Spielberg’s Lincoln

Alec Ryan, American Renaissance, November 23, 2012

“History” in the service of ideology.

Steven Spielberg’s latest “historical” sermon begins with The Bearded One smiling beatifically at two black Union soldiers, who recount their exploits at a battle that is a figment of Mr. Spielberg’s imagination. The bolder, more intelligent of the two hectors the President on the pay inequalities between black and white soldiers. The scene is interspersed with footage from the mythical battle, in which black Union troops overcome white Confederates in brutal hand-to-hand combat. A white face is stamped, drowning, into the mud by a booted black man.

This may be all you need to know about the movie.

Two white, hick Union soldiers run up breathlessly and ineptly try to recite Lincoln’s Gettysburg address for the President. They forget how it ends, and the recital is finished by the intelligent, complaining black private as he saunters off into the night. Stupid whites and smart blacks. We get it. We see that in every TV commercial during basketball timeouts.

It is all downhill from there, as Daniel Day-Lewis’s simpering, unbelievable Lincoln is surrounded by saintly, misty-eyed, cardboard-cutout blacks, as he battles courageously against the reactionary elements in Congress who would never give votes to “the Negro.” In fact, blacks had been voting in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey since the Articles of Confederation, and the 15th Amendment, which gave blacks the right to vote, was passed just a few years later, in 1869.

Someone remarks that the Confederates “want to take slavery even into South America.” The Spanish brought black slaves to the New World more than 100 years before the first slaves appeared in the British colonies, and slavery wasn’t abolished in Cuba until 1886 and Brazil in 1888. But who cares about the real story? Apart from a few enlightened men such as Lincoln and Thaddeus Stevens, all whites were rabid racists all too willing to sell out blacks for peace with the South, even when it was in its death throes. Mr. Spielberg knows that such distortions will slip past uncritical audiences.

The subtext, of course, is that the Union could not have defeated the Confederacy without the valiant efforts of black soldiers. Since the Union was full of vicious racists, they would have left blacks as they were had Lincoln not listened to urgings of his sanctified black housemaid and other ebony worthies.

Black Union soldiers.

In the modern Hollywood narrative, all American history revolves around the Sacred Black Experience. Lincoln confirms this, bending historical truth to paint the most ruthless, bloody-minded, strong-willed American leader in history as some kind of smug, pre-post-modern storyteller croaking gamely through the difficulties like a paleface Obama sans teleprompter. The few Southerners are snarling, greasy bigots, recoiling before the erect, scowling black Union guards as they slink by during a meeting that led to the Hampton Roads peace conference of February 1865.

No noble Lee, courageous Stonewall or knightly Forrest to see here; but why should we expect that? I was surprised not to see the Southern delegation accompanied by blond, Afrikaans-speaking advisors from South Africa, along with a few monocled British Empire villains. Another surprise was that General Grant was not played by Morgan Freeman or that Magic Negro extraordinaire, Samuel L. Jackson.

The film has throughout a sense of hushed awe, as if kowtowing to its own self-evident righteousness. There is no balance, no complexity, no sense of inner struggle or desperation. No opposing arguments. Its simplistic outlook more closely resembles the popcorn-psychology Avengers or Justice League rather than the serious historical movie that it clearly wishes to be acclaimed.

Mr. Day-Lewis radiates pompous self-absorption, and his interpretation jars against my gut-feeling of Lincoln, the rawboned, shrewd backwoods attorney–Lincoln, the Illinois rogue so memorably sketched in Flash for Freedom! by George MacDonald Fraser. Yes, Lincoln is involved in political skulduggery and intrigue, as the three fixers/bribers blunder and cajole their way through improbable situations in an effort to sway the House for the 13th Amendment, but it comes off as silly capering.

There is not the slightest hint, of course, that Lincoln wanted to free the slaves and then send them out of the country. No dramatic scenes from August 14, 1862, when Lincoln invited five black preachers to the White House and asked them to persuade other blacks to resettle in Central America. No earnest conversations between Lincoln and Rev. James Mitchell, whom he had put in charge of exporting blacks. All this would make eye-opening cinema, but why let the truth spoil an image of Lincoln as a pioneer egalitarian?

To Mr. Spielberg’s credit, the cinematography is superb, as is the period detail. Articulate speeches are also a welcome respite from the usual lowbrow movie soundbites. Yet the work is let down by the smarmy lead performance of Daniel Day-Lewis, as well as the historical inaccuracies and stereotypes, which have obviously been inserted to foist a politically-correct message onto the audience. And when will we get a realistic, multifaceted black character in a movie, instead of the constant stream of sinless, chocolate-hued demigods? When will the Magic Negro finally be retired? No time soon, judging by this travesty.

An interesting movie about black battlefield valor might be made about the troops who served in General George Crook’s Apache campaigns during the 1870s and 1880s. But would we see a black boot trampling an Apache face?

It is hardly astonishing that Hollywood has turned out yet another movie with an anti-white agenda this time from the director of the execrable Munich, which also played fast and loose with history in its sordid depiction of Israel’s use of a team of bungling amateurs to carry out a series of cold-blooded assassinations. Mr. Spielberg has, however, accomplished the unthinkable with this one. He has actually succeeded in making the Civil War look schmaltzy and one dimensional. The Sacred Black Experience is the only history that matters, and the only thing that ever prevented these noble Negroes from attaining their uplifting potential was foaming old white guys with mutton-chops.

As my wife and I left the cinema for the cold night, a pair of young black men swaggered by, baggy pants sagging past their buttocks, communicating in barely decipherable ebonic grunts.

We looked at each other with wry smiles and sighed.

Topics: , , , ,

Share This

Alec Ryan
Mr. Ryan describes himself as an ordinary working American with a strong interest in history. He lives in Las Vegas.
We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Puggg

    I’m surprised Spielspiel didn’t make someone prominent on the Southern side to be a stubbed moustache-wearing German. Since we already know that the founding of the American colonies was just like N**iism, it stands to reason that events a few centuries later could be just as N**i even though all predated the real N**is by a long time.

    • I am

      “… make someone prominent on the Southern side to be a stubbed moustache-wearing German.”


      With a monocle.

      • Nicholai Hel

        You must be channelling Q.Tarantino.

  • Michael Alan Prock

    Two quotes will suffice to place the above article in its proper context:
    “Show business is an extension of the Jewish religion.”
    former Beatles singer John Lennon
    “Non-Jews were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel… In Israel, death has no dominion over them… With gentiles, it will be like any person – They need to die, but God will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money… This is his servant… That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew… why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap; and we will sit like effendi and eat… That’s why gentiles were created.”
    former Chief Rabbi of Israel Ovadia Yosef

  • IstvanIN

    Knowing it was a Spielberg I knew it would be filled with lies, so no point in seeing the film from a historical perspective. In addition, why would any white person want to celebrate the life of the biggest mass murderer of the 19th century? Even in grammar school I found the whole idea of the war between the states something odd to celebrate. And it wasn’t a civil war in any sense of the word. First off the CSA did not want to take over the US, merely secede. Secondly what the North did to southern soldiers, southern civilians and the south in general is nothing less than war crimes certainly on a par with anything Stalin, Hitler, Mao or Pol Pot did. The main difference was they had technology Lincoln didn’t. Lincoln and his gang were criminals, no more, no less.

    • pcmustgo

      I would imagine you are a Southerner. I would imagine even today, Northern whites and Southern whites learn about and understand this event/war very differently.

      • JohnEngelman

        When I was in the fourth grade in Virginia my history book of Virginia described the sale of black slaves to the Jamestown settlement as a positive step forward.

        • Anonymouse

          I had that same history book in Hampton Roads (Virginia). All of our history lessons in fourth grade was dedicated to one topic: Virginia’s place in the Civil War. Those are lessons I will never forget.

      • IstvanIN

        Actually from South Jersey. We were taught to be proud of the fact that only one of New Jersey’s seven southern counties sent a regiment to fight for the north, and that South Jersey’s sympathies were with the south.

        • ancapian

          i wistle dixie in your general direction 😀

    • SLCain

      “In addition, why would any white person want to celebrate the life of the biggest mass murderer of the 19th century?”

      That’s not quite true. Perhaps as many as 20-30 million Chinese were killed in the Tai-Ping rebellion of the 1850s-1860s, altogether by both the Tai-Ping rebels and the Imperial government. Lincoln, with a mere 600,000 war dead to his credit, was a comparative piker.

      • IstvanIN

        Well, that may be true but China isn’t my problem. Nor does it lesson Lincoln’s crimes which no doubt left way more than 600,000 dead.

        • JohnEngelman

          Before the Civil War the great majority of immigrants moved to the North, because that is where the economic opportunities were, and wages were higher. Poor Southern whites were fools to fight for the Confederacy, especially because men who owned at least 20 slaves were exempt from the draft. Defending the Confederacy and slavery was a rich man’s war and a poor man’s fight.

          • Gracchus123

            “… was a rich man’s war and a poor man’s fight.”

            Isn’t that always the case with war, especially modern war?

          • IstvanIN

            Now that is true. The elites in general don’t fight. George Bush, Jr. and Dick Cheney had no qualms about sending young men off to be killed and maimed, both physically and mentally, in two useless, ongoing wars. Clinton was more than happy to bomb Serbia into a oblivion for defending their national integrity.

          • JohnEngelman

            John Kennedy fought in World War II. John Kerry fought in Vietnam. It is the prominent Republicans who were and are the chicken hawks.

          • Gracchus123

            Kennedy perhaps. Kerry’s service in Vietnam was way too choreographed for my tastes.

          • SLCain

            Yeah, like John McCain. By the way, where was Bill Clinton during the war in Vietnam?

            You are a deceitful idiot.

          • JohnEngelman

            Bill Clinton was demonstrating against the War in Vietnam like the brightest students from the finest universities in the United States. The centers of anti war activism were places like Harvard, Berkeley, and Columbia.

          • pecosbill

            John Kerry faked in Vietnam. Bull Halsey wanted to court martial “that little brat”, JFK, for destroying his PT boat and jeopardizing his men.

            Nixon was in the navy, Bush I flew a fighter bomber in WWII, Bush II flew fighter interceptors. Perhaps we shouldn’t forget Ike.

          • DelmarJackson

            Yes, please do not forget Ike, he is the last president I actually liked. He fought the nazis, warned us of the military industrial complex, and oversaw “operation wetback” which by merely enforcing current laws made 3 million illegals self deport.
            To see how far we have sunk, today wetback is a hate word, and anyone asking for self deportation is tagged as a racist advocating a hate crime, and if you dare use the word illegal alien, you are scornfully told you are being deliberately offensive and need to allow millions more to come or they will become even more upset.
            screw Reagan-
            I miss Ike!

          • danlieb7

            Including the loud mouth, obnoxious, pro gun, pro war, pro life conservative loser -Ted Nugent.

            For all his faux bravado about the US military, often demonizing & insulting President Obama and the Democrats, this draft dodging ( he dodged the draft twice in the Vietnam war) pusillanimous, low IQ, below average rock musician even had the chutzpah to openly make an idiotic challenge. Back in 2011, this moron Nugent openly declared that if President Obama was re elected in 2012, he would either be dead or would go to Jail. Well well well….its been over 2 weeks and little Ted is still hiding his ugly face like the coward & hypocrite that he truly is.


            Ironically, Ted is the archetypal wing nut lunatic fringe right wing white conservative in this country. People like him do no favors for the GOP nor the conservative movement at large. The white conservative movement will die out & become extinct NOT due to the liberals or minorities, BUT because of conservatives themselves.

          • JohnEngelman

            The white conservative movement will die out & become extinct NOT due to the liberals or minorities, BUT because of conservatives themselves.

            – danlieb7

            I would welcome a genuine conservative movement in the tradition of Edmund Burke. Unfortunately, what passes for conservatism in the United States is often little more than hatred for taxes and gun control laws.

            In the 1960s liberals went out on a limb to help blacks with civil rights legislation. Blacks cut off the limb with five years of black ghetto rioting, and more enduring increases in black social pathology. Liberals have been trying to recover ever since.

            One of my favorite political commentators is Thomas Edsall. Here is his explanation of how American liberalism ran off the rail during the 1960s and 1970s.


          • danlieb7

            I agree. I personally respect the conservative movement founded by Barry Goldwater, a movement which was rational, logical and favorable to actual freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness based on the visions of our founding fathers.

            However the “conservative” movement of today with all it’s “FOX-news-Glenn Beck-Rush Limbaugh-Laura Ingraham-Ann Coulter-racist-ultra right wing religious nut jobs” type of movement is a big sad JOKE!

          • Gracchus123

            “…with all it’s “FOX-news-Glenn Beck-Rush Limbaugh-Laura Ingraham-Ann Coulter-racist-ultra right wing religious nut jobs” type of movement is a big sad JOKE!”

            Can you show any “racist” comments or actions by any of the above named individuals? Also, what do you mean by “ultra right wing…”?

            Would you describe (after you define “racist”) most of the posters on this site as “racist”?

          • danlieb7


            Glenn Beck – Arch Fruitcake of the right wing fringe. This man is clearly the most insane unprofessional media personality ever to disgrace the TV screen. He is unqualified ( not even a graduate but just a high school diploma) and despite his lack of education and intelligence, he keeps inciting hatred and suspicion against blacks, Jews, Asians and hispanics. I bet his followers have to have an IQ of less than 67 to actually digest his nonsense! So bad was his record, that even conservative Fox had to fire this fat stupid clown!





          • Son of Sambo

            As much as I hate Glenn Beck, when you have a self-confessed Jew on here accusing anyone of “anti-Semitism” you can pretty much just tone it out, like you would the barking dog next door. Neither has a damn thing of substance to say, and both are just meaningless reflexes.
            He’s probably a troll anyway.

          • Gracchus123

            Never having watched Beck, I cannot say whether he ever actually attacked other races, but I found nothing in your samples in which he attacked other races, yet you called him a “racist”. Why?

            You disparaged him for not having a college degree. Why? Most Americans don’t have college degrees. That does not make them stupid, does it?

            Maybe the reason “Faux News” fired Beck is because Beck wandered off of the reservation of what is “acceptable” in our tightly controlled news industry.

            What about the rest of the so-called “conservatives” you attacked? Laura Ingraham, for example. I have seen her on TV many times, but have never heard her say anything that I would describe as “racist”. Can you give an example of a “racist” comment by her?

            Let me ask you again if you think most of the people on this site are “racist”? And you didn’t explain your “reasonable boundaries” comment.

            You say that you admire the “conservatism” of Barry Goldwater? Are you a Barry Goldwater conservative? Or are you a troll here to defend the other troll, John Engelman?

          • JohnEngelman

            I hope danlieb7 likes me. I like him. A troll is someone who angers fools by challenging their prejudices with facts and logic.

            I appreciate it when someone presents an argument I had not considered, or posts a fact I had not known. Those who complain about trolls resent that because for them thinking is a painful exercise.

          • Gracchus123

            He presented no coherent arguments; he simply called people names, the wailings of a loser. Troll.

          • danlieb7

            “called people names”????

            Looks like you are afraid of facts and logic my deluded friend. I have presented numerous links and evidence to support my views and yet for some odd reason, you show this irrational animus towards me. People like you remind me of those low IQ white conservative christian creationists who simply and rather stubbornly I must say, refute my views on the validity of evolution by ruminating their “faith” and “belief” in some myth from a Bronze age book, written in a desert in a remote corner of the middle east some 4500 odd years ago. Even when supplied with ample facts and evidence/ links, these arrogant conservative pro-gun/ pro-life white christians depict their retarded bigotry and prejudice based NOT on facts but on raw emotions and blind “faith”! Congrats for depicting who you really are?

            Oh and please spare me the boring “troll” rhetoric. That lame excuse has gone long enough to become stale. If you want to hide behind blind faith and emotions based on irrational bigotry and colossal stupidity, at least have the decency to use a new line of excuses to banter on about the “evils” of having people like me….don’t keep barking the same “he is a troll” BS. Its getting old and boring!

          • David Ashton

            Without the “Bronze age book” the State of Israel and your Defense Force would have no claim to a “corner of the middle east” from 1947/8 rather than to some less populated, less problematic, less desert and less tiny territory, such as northern Kenya or alternative areas proposed by Jewish Territorialists as a permanent sovereign homeland for this people. I do not support the annihilation of the present Israeli population now established, and I advocate internationally protected access to the holy places of Christians, Jews and Muslims however mythical their claims. And I can see why they do not want Palestinians returning to undermine the national character of Israel, just as other countries for the same reason do not want Muslim immigrants arriving as original settlers in theirs.
            But who can claim that “Zionism” has solved the age-old problem of “Antisemitism”?

          • Davie

            My my, people must wonder how civilization ever moved forward
            before the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. (sarcasm).

          • danlieb7

            As I have stated before, John Engleman is probably the most astute and cerebral posters on Amren, followed by Brandon Kaldian. John’s views on a subject are very rational, pragmatic, intellectually insightful and above all factual as opposed to emotional. I look forward to John’s posts on Amren, because they are also educational and it often turns out that he is eventually almost always right about most things concerning our history, culture and politics. Kudos Mr. Engleman.

          • Gracchus123

            “… John Engleman is probably the most astute and cerebral posters on Amren,…”

            Simply your opinion.

          • JohnEngelman


            Thank you very much. I wish you posted more often here. I would add David Ashton to the list of “astute and cerebral posters on Amren,” and you to.

          • SLCain

            No, we dislike them because they (you) try to hijack this site to push your own agenda – an agenda that is inimical to that which this very site stands for.

          • JohnEngelman

            I have enjoyed political arguments ever since I was a child and advocated the integration of the elementary school I attended. What I appreciate however is the civil exchange of facts and logically derived conclusions.

            If you only want your prejudices to be reinforced perhaps you would feel more comfortable having the reinforced at your neighborhood tavern.

          • SLCain

            “What I appreciate however is the civil exchange of facts and logically derived conclusions.”

            “perhaps you would feel
            more comfortable having them reinforced at your neighborhood tavern.”

            Go to Hell. I’ve been posting here long before you were, swine.

          • JohnEngelman

            You seldom contribute anythings but anger, hostility, and insults.

          • SLCain

            Anger, hostility, and insults are all YOU deserve, swine.

            Do you even have a life? You continuously post voluminous outpourings of bilge at this site. This confims my impression that you are deranged, you pathetic little chump.

          • JohnEngelman

            Your insults say nothing about me, while revealing the ugliness of your personality and character.

          • SLCain

            “I hope danlieb7 likes me. I like him.”

            Great. Why don’t you two go get a hotel room, and leave the rest of us the hell alone.

          • JohnEngelman

            American Renaissance is open to different points of view. If you are unable to civilly debate yours, perhaps you should leave.

          • SLCain

            Let’s have a vote of those here on who wants whom to leave.

            By the way when I called you stupid and deranged, I WAS being civil.

          • JohnEngelman

            St. Cain, you are filled with anger and hate because you are not the man you wish you were. You make me think of the following sentence from “The True Believer,” by Eric Hoffer, “The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready he is to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause.”

          • danlieb7

            “Never having watched Beck, I cannot say whether he ever actually attacked other races, but I found nothing in your samples in which he attacked other races, yet you called him a “racist”. Why?”

            So, you claim not to have seen Beck, but you somehow managed to ascertain that he is not a racist. And the samples I provided clearly show the low IQ irrational fat bigot clown that he really is. If you were unable to figure that out from the links I provided than I can confidently state that either you are so retarded cursed with an IQ <70 or perhaps you are lying!

            "You disparaged him for not having a college degree. Why? Most Americans don't have college degrees. That does not make them stupid, does it?"

            To have a job as a journalist or TV reporter – it IS strongly recommended and more so even required in most nations including here to have either a bachelor or master degree in journalism, communications, arts or in some cases even a higher professional degree in medicine ( Dr. Sanjay Gupta, MD, Chief Medical Officer, CNN or law (Megyn Kelly, JD, "Kelly's Court" Fox News). After all, had an under qualified black or hispanic been a TV reporter without a standard set of educational qualifications, I'm sure all hell would have broken loose and you would have been one of the first to scream "bloody murder!" Double Standards?

            Whether you like it or not, for any job today and more so, a job that involves some sort of intellectual caliber apart from first professional degrees of course (i.e. Medicine, Law, Engineering, Physical Therapy, Pharmacy, Dentistry, Accountant, Economics,etc) you NEED to have adequate educational credentials. If most white Americans don't go to college, well that is their problem not mine. Had Jared Taylor not gone to a fancy Ivy League University like Yale, no one on would have taken him seriously, heck he would have been ignored just like you ignore a mad man rambling in the middle of a street, selling pencils in a paper cup!

            "Maybe the reason "Faux News" fired Beck is because Beck wandered off of the reservation of what is "acceptable" in our tightly controlled news industry."

            Hah, so now even you seem to imply on admission that Beck stated something so vitriolic and obviously racist that Fox had to kick his fat dumb derriere out!

            "What about the rest of the so-called "conservatives" you attacked? Laura Ingraham, for example. I have seen her on TV many times, but have never heard her say anything that I would describe as "racist". Can you give an example of a "racist" comment by her?"


            Also, funny how someone like Ingraham and Ann Coulter who keep harping with their idiotic annoying nasal tones about how pro-family, pro-life and pro-hetro-sexual marriage they are somehow managed to stay single and never got into the sacred sacrament of matrimony themselves, neither do any of themselves have their own biological children. Instead, these conservative loony women have had numerous affairs (including with liberal white and non white men like Dinesh D'Souza) sans marriage! Classic hypocrisy of the deluded conservative mind!

            "You say that you admire the "conservatism" of Barry Goldwater? Are you a Barry Goldwater conservative? Or are you a troll here to defend the other troll, John Engelman?"

            I agree with Goldwater's conservative ideology NOT the nonsense that passes off as conservatism today. Btw, I don't consider myself a liberal. I'm a rationalist, I see the world in shades of grey – NOT black or white! Human nature is too complex and so is our universe with all it's 11 dimensions of reality! If John Engleman is a troll, I'd be honored to be in the same league. I shall now wear my "troll" tag as a badge of honor! Thank you 🙂

          • Gracchus123

            I watched the links you posted; I saw/heard nothing “racist” from Beck. You’re still name-calling and making sweeping assumptions about me and others. You have no idea what my politics are yet you say I remind you of low IQ conservatives, blah, blah, blah.

            Your incoherent rant is ridiculous. You and Engelman are truly “two peas in a pod”. I am through with wasting time on you both.

            And you are not nearly as intelligent as you obviously think you are. As for me reminding you of a “low IQ bible thumping conservative, or words to that effect”, I know what my IQ is and it is by no means low. I have an advanced degree in molecular biophysics and have taught for years in academia. I have traveled and worked around the world, and run a successful private consulting business with world-wide clients.

            You are mundane, predictable, and obviously immature. Go away and take your troll friend with you.

          • danlieb7

            If what you stated is true, than judging by your appalling logical and analytic skills, I can only feel sorry for your students. I wonder what academic institution would employ a childish, emotional insecure man person like you?
            Ah, Molecular Bio-Physics to unsuspecting sheeple – conservative white christian biology indeed 🙂



            Was it the Bob Jones University? Or perhaps the best you could do was Indiana Wesleyan. And of course despite the overwhelming evidence, the denial is classic and so archetypal of you folks. Just like the denial from you like minded brethren:



            And thank goodness that your side is steadily & surely losing! There really must be a God after all, eh?

          • Gracchus123

            I don’t recall ever stating that I was Christian. You reconfirm your idiocy with every post.

          • danlieb7

            I drew parallels or are you too retarded to even understand that? Hah, talk about idiocy, look who’s talkin’!

          • danlieb7

            Do you understand the meaning of the word “congruence” or is “idiocy” your middle name? Oh the irony!

          • Gracchus123

            “…childish, emotional & insecure person like you?”

            Name calling is the refuge of someone who has nothing substantive to say.

          • danlieb7

            “”…childish, emotional & insecure person like you?””

            Look at the mirror!

          • danlieb7

            I agree with your views on most blacks (not all, some are awesome). They need to evolve and take responsibility instead of acting like feral beasts. My community (Jewish) has been at the forefront of such civil rights programs to promote blacks. In fact even this movie – “Lincoln” 2012 is directed & produced by a liberal Jew ( Steven Spielberg) starring a famous British Jew ( Daniel Day Lewis), and needless to say, the plot of this brilliant movie is in some ways sympathetic to the plight of blacks.


            I despise racism, I believe we can all co exist in reasonable boundaries, however, some groups of people need to get the chip off their shoulder and take responsibility to better themselves.

          • Gracchus123

            “I despise racism, I believe we can all co exist in reasonable boundaries, …”

            What do you mean by “racism”? Also, please describe what you mean by “co exist in reasonable boundaries…”

          • danlieb7

            I despise racism as defined by the dictionary. I’m not a bigot and I can see the beauty & ugliness in every race or ethnic group. For example, I’ve served in the IDF (Israel Defence Forces) and I’ve personally had to serve in places hostile to us in the Palestine Territories and Lebanon, however, just because we’re on the opposite sides of the spectrum that did not mean, I could never appreciate certain positive aspects of the Arabs (eg: Arab hospitality, food, sense of humor, love for horse racing and music etc).

            To think of demonizing an entire race is not only ridiculous but plain evil! Eg: The 3rd reich in the Weimar republic of Germany demonizing the entire Jewish race. Humans are complex and no particular human group irrespective of race and gender can be treated as a monolith. Not because this is the politically correct thing to do, but more so, because it is the right thing to do!

          • Gracchus123

            You served in the IDF; congratulations. Have you also served in the US military?

          • danlieb7

            No, I got my US citizenship in 2010.

          • David Ashton

            They are two peas in a pod and two trolls in a hole (one now self-admitted).

          • JohnEngelman


            I am glad you are here. Please keep posting comments.

          • SLCain

            Do you realize that a lot of gentiles are tired of being demonized as a group by jews?

          • JohnEngelman

            I have never seen gentiles demonized as a group by Jews. I have seen Jews demonized by antisemites. It makes me angry, and almost sick to my stomach. The Jews are such a superior group of people.

          • JohnEngelman


            Please post more often. We need your voice here.

          • David Ashton

            This article from “The Atlantic” is worth reading, and reads ironically 11 years after it was written, since Obama has gathered a coalition of demanding “minorities” in conjunction with the “relentless secular assault” described therein, while Republicans have not played their “trump card” of “race” (or at least they got the name without the game). Those of us who also read widely, though a little more widely perhaps, will also have information on the ideological origins of the still unimpeded “coercive liberal cabal” mentioned by Thomas Edsall.
            The Burkean tradition in US politics was better expressed by Russell Kirk and even Patrick Buchanan than by Obama’s mentors and appointees.

          • JohnEngelman

            Peter Viereck, who used the philosophy of Edmund Burke to justify Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal made a Burkean of me.

            There are conservative aspects of my thinking. I am pessimistic about human nature and human potential. I think there is often wisdom in tradition. I distrust abrupt social and economic changes in any direction.

            Unfortunately, in the United States “conservatism” often means little more than hatred of taxes and gun control laws.

          • i am

            Ted Nugent is a narcissistic psychopath. The man is in love with himself. He is a fool, idiot, and coward just like all narcissists.

          • Luca

            Does the name Eisenhower ring a bell? What about Nixon? GHW Bush? Gerald Ford? Teddy Roosevelt? Be fair.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            Like Eisenhower or Patton?

            My FBI file says “firearms expert, explosives expert, chemist, ex-mercenary”. My wife’s great-grandfather sank an aircraft carrier the hard way.

          • JohnEngelman

            Where are the prominent Republicans who fought in Vietnam?

          • I have to disagree about the conflict in Afghanistan. After 9-11-01, we had to go in, after the Taliban regime refused to hand over Osama Bin Laden. Bush’s stupidity was going into Iraq, at almost the same time.

          • IstvanIN

            They could have sent in special forces to capture Osama and avoided a lot of dead American soldiers. The US Government has killed and maimed more Americans in useless wars “justified” by the war on terror than the Muslims did in bringing down the Trade Center. In no event should we have occupied Afghanistan.

          • Le Gaulois

            “Clinton was more than happy to bomb Serbia into a oblivion for defending their national integrity.”

            I usually more than agree with you Istvan, but Serbia never was bombed into oblivion. Milosevic was simply right in the midst of killing and cleansing Kosovo of its indigenous Albanian civilians which comprised 90% of its population, no less. NATO (including the Brits and the French) simply put a stop to it to avoid what the Serbs did in Bosnia (ie: Sarajevo siege, Srebenica massacre), and the bombing ended as soon as Milosevic stopped.

            The Serbs like to claim that “Kosovo is Serbia” but the indigenous Albanians were already the majority there long before the Serbs lost it to the Turks in 1389 (Battle of Kosovo) and only got it back in 1912 (Second Balkan War).

            The 78 days NATO bombing was a slap in the wrist compared to what the Serbs inflicted for years to their Balkan neighbors (Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks and Kosovars) in the name of “Greater Serbia”, and White nationalists really ought to know better to use it as an argument for defending one’s “national integrity”:

            Is Kosovo Serbia ?:


          • pecosbill

            Poor northerners and immigrants were fools to fight to save the big slave labor industries of the north.

            Those who owned slaves were few in the south, and those who were exempt by owning large numbers of slaves were fewer still.

            The north allowed anyone to buy out of the draft for a few dollars.,

            The result was that more rich men in the north escaped the war than did slave owners in the south.

          • deffe

            “Poor Southern whites were fools to fight for the Confederacy”

            That’s right, just look at the great paradise we got out of the Northern victory. Idiot.

          • JohnEngelman

            The United States went on to become the strongest and richest country in the world.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            Yes, but the real issue at hand was states’ rights.

            The whole war was a monstrosity – I doubt you’ve been to one. It was over the future of the US west, and whether the northern industrial robber barons or the southern planter robber barons would profit the most.

            Folks in Kansas and Missouri were fighting CW-I a decade before official kickoff at Fort Sumter.

          • JohnEngelman

            States rights is the cause championed by those who realize that most Americans disagree with them. By 1860 most other countries had had abolished slavery in their countries and in their colonies. Slavery was becoming unpopular in the United States. The slaves would have eventually been freed by either a Constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court decision if there had been no civil war.

          • Davie

            Not very original, and please don’t forget that wealthy Northerners could buy their way out of US military service during the Civil War,

        • SLCain

          I included that little fact for the benefit of our resident asian-booster, John Engelman

          • JohnEngelman

            Orientals are a marvelous race.

  • laager

    Does this mean the Steven Spielberg is now an integral part of the Zionist psy-ops campaign emanating from Hollywood?

  • Athling

    Unfortunately, many young whites will take this movie as historic fact. This is a particular peeve of mine — the continual aggrandizement of the black male. He is portrayed by a certain segment of our society as superb athlete, highly intelligent, and the ideal mate for the white female. Think I am exaggerating in any way? See here…

    Scroll down the page and watch the clips which document how the white man is portrayed as a bumbling idiot compared to the intelligent, masculine, handsome, sexually desirable black man. Especially by white women who actually shun the white man in favor of the black man in these clips. They have gone from subtle suggestion a few years ago to in-your-face blatant today.

    The messages being sent by advertisers and the media is clear. White boys are being taught through psychological manipulation that the black man is his superior. White girls are being taught that the white man is weak, almost effeminate, compared to the manly and wise black man. It is the black man that she should be involved with. It is he that she should have desires for.

    The black man as he actually is with no white influence upon him is never shown. To see the black man as he exists today without any white influence upon him see here…

    That is actual modern footage of the black man as he would also exist here in the US if he were isolated from white culture. This is the real black man being pawned off as our superior. This is what the media is suggesting your daughter mate with.

    I’ve a gut full of this evilry put upon us by the media!

    • Athling

      We really have to watch anything put out by Hollywood with a critical eye. I have several acquaintances who work in the film industry and therefore know how painstakingly exact the making of films and advertising is. The lighting, facial expressions, body language, atmosphere, and dialouge is micro-managed to get the desired psychological effect.

      From the website I posted above, watch this brief video as an example…

      Notice how they have the white woman behaving.

    • pcmustgo

      All of those ads are written by white males.

      Btw, many white males have lost their masculinity. I can’t tell you how many white men I meet and have even dated who literally sound like gay men (particularly here in NYC). It’s shocking. I assume they’re gay- until I meet their girlfriend. The hip cool thing here is for straight men to act gay… all metrosexualizied.

      So it’s funny everyone harps on about white feminazis… lol,. what happened to men?

      I am not saying Black men are a great dating option or are more “real men”, as we all know Black men generally fail to be “real men” in many other ways and in actuality, in black culture, it is the black female who is really in charge. Black men are also more likely to be bisexual.

      • Athling

        That is not true of the white men I know and associate with. The point is the influence the media has on the psche of young and impressionable white people. The black male should be no dating option for a white female. Our sense of unity as a people has fallen to the point that he would even be considered as a sexual mate. You’re saying he may not be a great option. I’m saying he is no option at all. Anyone concerned with the future of our people would be saying the same thing.

        • pcmustgo

          You’re right, it is not all white men, but is particularly prevalent here in NYC. I don’t think these “talks just like a gay guy” white men really are gay… I don’t think so. One was one of my teachers who was married to a woman and went out of his way to flirt with me/seduce me in class. Another I dated. He seemed obsessed with / puss- whipped by his ex-wife. So no, I do not think these are downlow bisexual men. I think they grew up in this metrosexual culture thinking talking in that gay way is sophisiticated or cultured or something.

          • BowleDover

            Don’t forget that acting swishy can be an effective dating strategy, particularly with art-school/hipster girls in places like NYC. Not my cup of tea, but I’ve seen guys have an amazing amount of success with that one.

            Also, I see a lot of people decrying White men as weak and effeminate, but compared to what? Black thugs who get in a fistfight every other day and have no qualms about attacking innocent strangers? They’re the abomination, not us. I agree that White people need to learn to defend themselves, but isn’t the reason for having civilization at all that people don’t have to live by the law of the jungle? I say make Whites aware of the violence perpetrated against them and steer people into learning to defend themselves, but understand that the rules have changed in a relatively short amount of time and don’t condemn our own people too harshly. Questioning White men’s masculinity for being peaceful and culturally sophisticated is like trashing a Rolex for not being an effective hammer.

          • Gary

            I would say both of you are somewhat in denial. I certainly agree there are cases where hipser , effeminine men are heterosexual. but in a number of cases, a sizeable number are clearly bisexual or homosexual whether closeted or out in the open.

          • Ulick

            The professor you describe sounds like the classic effete intellectual. The type you see in Starbucks sitting with their legs crossed and pontificating in a condescending tone.

      • IstvanIN

        All of those ads are written by white males.

        I wouldn’t be so sure, I bet most are written by you know who.

      • Frank

        Having a girlfriend does not mean that they are heterosexual. These men could be using women as a cover for their closeted homosexuality. In some cases, your primary gaydar insitncts are probably correct.

        • pcmustgo

          Another interesting conversation would be how much whites in general, including the women, the straights, are obsessed with and worship gay culture (aka, the only way to be an oppressed minority victim and still be white). Don’t get me started on how many straight whites I know who desperately try to associate with the gay culture out of some need to make their lives more interesting.

          • Edward

            Goodness knows Hollywood has done everything it possibly can to promote same sex relationships. I am surprised there are not more White gay men and women than do exist.

          • Peoplearediverse

            You are right about the Gay worship! Gay is the “Holy Spirit!”

            The Triune God of PC:
            The Jewish Father
            The Negro Christ
            The Gay (Infertile) Spirit

        • White and Proud

          Very good point.

      • IstvanIN

        All of those ads are written by white males.

        No they are not, not by a log shot.

        • jay11

          True, the ads have ‘the tribe’ stamped all over them.

      • jay11

        I am from a small town in what’s left of ‘real’ America. Moved to a big urban area for work a number of years ago. One of the first things I noticed, besided the ‘richness’ of diversity, was how many urban whites are literally like foreigners to me.

        The urban women are mostly flaky tarts flitting from one vapid ‘artsy’ thing to another. Most are ‘super smart’ but live with absolutely no moral code, discipline or guidance for life. A few are still ‘good’ but they’re hard to find.

        The young men fall into three categories: hipsters, metros and white ethnic meatheads, some of whom go into wiggerdom with their thuggishness.
        The hipsters and metros are so USELESS. They do reclaim areas for whites that had been taken over by blacks/latinos (gentrification, as it’s called), and they do cause yummy restaurants to flourish, but they are so weak and effeminate. The ‘ironic’ clothing they wear (dumpster diving from the 1970s) is so important to them.
        They’re always worried about the next ‘underground’ band, and most seem like they are just big kids living some weird psychadelic fantasy. They shack up with 3-4 roommates to pay the bills on their coffee shop salaries and try their best to outdo the next grungy guy in conformity to the hipster ethos. Forget about the ‘Friends’ lifestyle, they take ‘The Big Bang Theory’ or ‘Modern Family’ as cultural gold.

        The metros are just so sad too. No wonder so many white chicks are going black/latino around here. At least they still exude manly aggression, even if it is ultimately dangerous. The metros are like hipsters with more money/class, but how can you rely on a man who gets pedicures every week and espouses his love for all things gay while professing to be straight? If you ever saw the Hunger Games, the flambouyant people of the “Capital” are what modern white 20-somethings aspire to in urban areas like mine. Life is just a big fashion show and endless parade of pleasures. The hipsters pay lip service to ‘social justice’ causes and love slumming it as a lifestyle to prove their liberal cred, but metros like that ‘fabulous’ lifestyle best depicted in their affinity for higher end dance clubs and art shows..

        The ethnic whites are not our salvation folks. Their young men mostly are thuggish, not at all civilized like most regular middle class Americans we’ve always known growing up. Their young men are into rap/hip hop, wear the ghetto themed sports clothes, shave their heads, are rowdy and some go over into straight wiggerdom. They are also very anti-intellectual at every level and combine elements of their parents or grandparents ethnic cultures with gangsta rap bravado.

        It’s hard to see any white people where I’m at right now and feel any cultural affinity with them as an American. Ours is a people who are passing away. Even in the last remaining years of the Roman Empire, some people saw where things were going and lamented the fall of a great civilization. The tragedy now is that there will be no resevoir of latent talent to make a new civilization centuries from now. 50 years from now when competing black/latino and asians enclaves put the final nail in the coffin, will any of their descendants build a first world civilization again?

        • pcmustgo

          I am assuming (I know for sure now) you moved to NYC, where I live….. yeah…. honestly, most of the hipsters look like little elves

          • pcmustgo

            But most of the hipster women have no problem with their effeminate women. And yes, many of the hipster and/or other women are also into the adrogynous look or the feminist stuff.

          • pcmustgo

            Oh, THIS IS NOT A KNOCK ON ALL WHITE MALES…. I see less of this effeminate/metrosexual stuff in other states, other cities, smaller cities, etc. It’s really just a NYC/LA/San Francisco thing.

          • Blaak Obongo

            Although it sounds exactly like the Major Eastern University(tm) where I used to work.

          • Dean

            Alot of these women are lesbian or bisexual.

          • dukem1

            Lesbian? Well I don’t know about that. But bisexual? Well, at least a guy’s got a 50-50 chance there, which is probably about average.

        • JackKrak

          Jay, that is best description of those people I’ve ever read – absolutely dead on.

        • LogicFolk

          The asian has never disproven the idea that he quite capable of civilization. The end of the white man has nothing to do with promises of a post-apocalyptic, it is different and in many ways worse; racial stratification between our genocided mudrace and asians will be a very real thing.

        • Robert

          Jay 11:
          “The ethnic whites are not our salvation folks. Their young men mostly are thuggish, not at all civilized like most regular middle class Americans we’ve always known growing up. Their young men are into rap/hip hop, wear the ghetto themed sports clothes, shave their heads, are rowdy and some go over into straight wiggerdom. They are also very anti-intellectual at every level and combine elements of their parents or grandparents ethnic cultures with gangsta rap bravado.”

          You are absolutely correct. Alot of these White ethnic men date Black women
          and a growing number are marrying them as well. Sad.

        • JFKFC

          “I am from a small town in what’s left of ‘real’ America.” I read this with some sadness. Over the years I’ve met people from upstate NY towns or towns in Pennsylvania who have had to move to the NYC area because there are no more jobs in the areas they grew up in. They often strike me as being from another American culture, a more traditional one from the past. Then they move to New York and it’s like another country. Less egalitarian.Traditional gender roles and behavior a thing of the past. More elitist (I use the term “Brazilified”) with a top class of wealthy, cosmopolitan whites living affluent, sophisticated (and, yes, sometimes metrosexual) lifestyles and a vast non-white working-class (with more traditional gender roles) living in the more affordable (but less hospitable to whites) parts of town. These traditional white Americans from small towns understandably feel completely alienated. They often find an affordable place to live in the white lower-middle or working-class areas outside of Manhattan. That’s where they have the (dis)pleasure of meeting the “white ethnic meatheads.”
          “The ethnic whites are not our salvation folks…They are also very anti-intellectual at every level and combine elements of their parents or grandparents ethnic cultures with gangsta rap bravado.” Sounds like you have been getting to know some of the locals! Welcome to New York! All kidding aside, I totally agree with you. These said “ethnic whites” you speak of are on the most degraded end of the Euro-American spectrum. It is partly an issue of intelligence and social class. The smarter ones moved up and out, The less promising stayed in their little neighborhoods and always had an inclination for brutality and organized crime. They are intensely anti-intellectual. I would know. I grew up around a lot of them in the New York suburbs. Such meatheads despised and were hostile to the larger Anglo-Saxon American people and culture. Wilmot Robertson in his book “The Dispossessed Majority” considered certain white ethnic groups to be less likely to assimilate into the larger Euro-American culture. He was right.

          • Son of Sambo

            “These said “ethnic whites” you speak of are on the most degraded end of the Euro-American spectrum. It is partly an issue of intelligence and social class. The smarter ones moved up and out, The less promising stayed in their little neighborhoods and always had an inclination for brutality and organized crime. They are intensely anti-intellectual. I would know. I grew up around a lot of them in the New York suburbs. Such meatheads despised and were hostile to the larger Anglo-Saxon American people and culture. Wilmot Robertson in his book “The Dispossessed Majority” considered certain white ethnic groups to be less likely to assimilate into the larger Euro-American culture. He was right.”

            I’m assuming this is just Italian-bashing backed up by Nordicism, right? I’m sure you’re gonna tell me that them dagos is all mulattoes anyway.
            I’m not seeing much White ethnicism among any European groups, be they Italian or “Anglo-Saxon.” No, the ethnic whites sure aren’t our salvation, but neither are the WASPs. Southerners and possibly Mormons are about it, and neither group is ethnically healthy.
            There are the Amish, however.

          • JFKFC

            I didn’t use the word “Italian” so don’t assume anything, sonny. And just where did I praise Nordicism? As far as “ethnic whites” (or any other whites) and salvation are concerned, you would have to discuss that topic with the person who originally brought it up: jay11.

          • saxonsun

            By traditional gender roles, you mean the enslavement of women to/by men. This is why whites have lost so many women. As a white woman, I can tell you this is the truth. Lots of women don’t want to live the little heterosexual “dream.” You cannot force us although you’d like to.

          • JFKFC

            Huh? Uh….yeah, right. Whatever you say!

          • David Ashton

            Lose them to black men, lesbians or what?
            Would you like children, and men to help you look after them?

          • Michael_C_Scott

            As a white (mostly white, anyway) man, we don’t “enslave” women. Marriage at its best should be between two people who are already best friends.

            I’m all about freedom of choice. My choice was marrying a Japanese gal. Your choice might be marrying an African who will eventually kill you.

            The notion you have of us white – or nearly white – males wanting to use force with you is silly. We’re equal now, so I simply refuse to have anything to do with liberal Democrat women. Yes, you are entitled to your own opinions, but I need not respect them, so I stayed away and married a Japanese lady who is even more conservative than I.

          • nobody

            This is a pretty wild accusation. I believe that we have traditional roles for a reason, it doesn’t mean I chain my girlfriend up in the kitchen and beat her. In the past when we, white people, lived a different type of existence a man had to go out and hunt food for his family or they would never survive the harsh winters. Obviously there are some physical differences between men and women, this isn’t a negative thing it’s just how it is. Obviously women in the past weren’t out killing mastadons and sabretooth tigers, they were at home taking care of their children. Is this sexist and discriminatory? Absolutely not. It is just the natural order of things. There is a HUGE difference between a natural family unit and “enslaving” a woman. Ridiculous.

          • “Then they move to New York and it’s like another country”

            I was born in New York and walking the streets I too feel like a foreigner. I am reminded of Enoch Powell’s speech… about how the English were being replaced, and feeling that “they are now the unwanted”.

            However, regarding the larger “Anglo-Saxon American people”, I think they are gone as an identifiable group except for in the South and in Mormon communities. I could go a week without running into a white person with an English surname, and when I do I find that it was an Anglicization from a different language (“Smiths” whose families were originally “Schmidts”).

        • White_Prime77

          ‘Ours is a people who are passing away. Even in the last remaining years of the Roman Empire, some people saw where things were going and lamented the fall of a great civilization.’

          Get out of New York!

          There are plenty of healthy White communities fly-over-country.

          Heck I live in a very liberal college town on the West Coast, and even here we have lots of folks on the SPLC watch lists and plenty of Dissident Rightists right here!!

          New York must be one of the worst places for a racially aware White Person to live, please for your own sanity: relocate!

        • David Ashton

          Decent but masculine and intelligent men must unite right across the Euro-American world. This picture of wiggadom &c has its counterpart in Britain, but we still have an educated officer class in our armed services and other sections of our society, who despite PC criteria and a degenerate entertainment culture could form the nucleus of a resurrection. Somehow we have to rescue the rest of our youth from a harmful “cultural” environment – hard work in gainful employment and sometimes a religious affiliation helps, but these too are admittedly under threat.
          To repeat my advice: (1) secure the heritage; (2) breed like kind; (3) master the technology and content of the internet.

        • bob sims

          Get back to the Land. Get out of the urban cancers.

        • baldy

          I want to point out that not every young white man who shaves his head is trying to be some ghetto thug.

        • I don’t think you are seeing the whole story. I am a Queens-born and Jersey-raised patriot, and I see our only hope to be the “middle-children” of the last great European migration. The WASPs that still are alive are garbage, and mostly the enemy. The first-gen. ethnics are also mostly the enemy. But in between there are young men and women that have no home but here, in this mid-Atlantic soil, and we are pissed the hell off by the fact that the old WASP groups us with the new colored horde. We are Americaner. We have no homeland in Europe and we are slowly seeing that our only hope for one is to fight for something here. We are the steel the melting-pot made before they started throwing the Negro and other colored people in. And we are ready to get raw on the tyranny we face. We are not unlike you folks in the little towns. We spend our lives envying you. And we will be with you when the structure falls apart.

      • Daisy

        There’s quite a wealth of distorted lenses being used to view things in this conversation, but I’ll point out at least one: Lincoln was written by a jew, directed by a jew, and likely produced by almost all jews (Kathleen Kennedy was one producer I recall seeing in the credits who is an exception.)

        I distinguish between white men and jewish men, as I recognize white as an ethnicity made up in the US of northwestern europeans primarily. People who say they come from the Middle East really don’t fit into even the totally european category and it does seem notable to me that a jewish-made film so seriously distorts ‘race’ issues in this film.

    • David Ashton

      I noticed that one of the miscegenation videos noted above has been removed because of YouTube’s opposition to “hate speech”. When will it become illegal to make a rational case against race-crossing and against race-replacement?

    • Gereng

      This certainly accords with my own observations from 6.5 yrs in black Africa. Crude, stupid, vicious, ignorant…dirty beyond understanding and physically repulsive in the bargain. Its all still there in their DNA..only requiring a trigger to set it free.

  • WildDan

    AmRen already saved me from watching Ridley Scott’s ‘Prometheus’. Now they’ve also saved me from ever watching this ‘movie’. Thanks.

    • pcmustgo

      Ridley Scott , one could argue, has made many movies (Blade Runner and Black Hawk Down) which are very leery of multi-culturalism.

      • Most futuristic movies sure don’t reflect the diversity Utopia we’re supposed to be creating.

        • SLCain

          Like, for example, Spielberg’s own “Minority Report”, which had all of about one black gun in it.

    • Another movie you can skip is “Red Dawn”.

      The first on-line review posted to a non-race conscious board I read was pointing out all the PC inserted races and ethnic groups. When it becomes this blatant that even the average film goer starts to notice that every film has to have the correct mix of ‘diversity’, you know it’s heavy handed and intrusive.

    • MikeofAges

      The only thing science fiction can do, in common with all imaginative literature, is describe the present time in which it is created. Keep that in mind.

      Saw part, thought not all of Prometheus. Saved from the rest of it by Thanksgiving day football. In my opinion, it was dog of a movie anyway. The development from the premise was shallow and implausible, and the characters a collection of cardboard boobies. The captain might be the sole exception, but perhaps that was deliberate. He at least passably comes across as someone who could be a service academy graduate who acts “black” simply because he likes doing it. Most likely, the reason he was was cast and developed that way was because if his character was too much an idiotic stereotype, the film would have fallen apart entirely. I doubt the captain part was written as a black part. Basically fare for teenagers and post adolescent stoners. Even the visual virtuosity got boring pretty quick. Yuck.

  • eiszeit

    Director: Spielberg
    Writer: Kushner

    What else do you need to know?

    “It is hardly astonishing that Hollywood has turned out yet another movie
    with an anti-white agenda this time from the director of the execrable Munich”

    Is this writer for real? If anything, Munich glorified jews murdering non-jews. Every death of a goy happened on screen in full gory detail while every jewish death occurred off-screen, like it was something so horrible it couldn’t possibly be portrayed. And let’s not even mention the scene where a gang of jewish guys cruelly execute a naked White woman. The ultimate semitic fantasy.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    This from a column by D. G. Martin, host of UNC-TV’s “North Carolina Bookwatch”:

    According to Escott, Lincoln never significantly altered the racial views he outlined in an 1858 debate with Stephen Douglas: “I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races … there is a physical difference between the white and black races which will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

    But Lincoln preferred a plan that would separate blacks by sending them to colonies in other parts of the world.

    In July 1862, he tried to sell his colonization plan to a group of free blacks on the basis of a need to separate: “Why-should the people of your race be colonized, and where? You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both …. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated.”


    Lincoln’s efforts on behalf of colonization of blacks before he issued the Emancipation Proclamation are well known, but he pursued colonization of blacks for a least a year AFTER he signed the Emancipation Proclamation. Excerpt from “Book: Lincoln sought to deport freed slaves,” By Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times, February 9, 2011:

    “… What we know now is he [Lincoln] did continue the effort for at least a year after the proclamation was signed.”

    “Mr. [Phillip] Magness [George Mason University researcher] said the key documents he and his co-author, Sebastian N. Page, a junior research fellow at Oxford, found were in British archives, and included an order authorizing a British colonial agent to begin recruiting freed slaves to be sent to the Caribbean in June 1863.

    “By early 1864, the scheme had fallen apart, with British officials fretting over the legality of the Emancipation Proclamation and the risk that the South could still win the war, and with the U.S. Congress questioning how the money was being spent.”

    • Tim J.

      Thank you for this information. Lincoln, then, perceived two threats to the “union”:
      (1) a separated Confederacy destined as such to revert to being a semi-colony of Britain
      a n d
      (2) the presence of Negroes amidst the majority population ???
      Why should AR be at odds with this stance??

  • Barrack Osama

    It sounds pretty dumb and cliche. Wouldn’t be surprised if it bombs.

    • This came out of Hollywood. Won’t be surprised it it was nominated for multiple Oscars.

      • George

        It will be. In fact, Daniel Day Lewis is already a considered a front runner for best actor.

    • JohnEngelman

      Lincoln opened with a solid $268,000 at 11 North American theaters this past Friday, November 9, according to studio estimates found at Box Office Mojo. Directed by Steven Spielberg, and starring Daniel Day-Lewis as U.S. president Abraham Lincoln, the historical drama about Lincoln’s fight to put an end to slavery in the United States has mostly received enthusiastic acclaim. Lincoln currently enjoys a 94% approval rating and 8.4/10 average among Rotten Tomatoes‘ top critics. (Daniel Day-Lewis as Abraham Lincoln in Steven Spielberg’s historical drama.)

      Lincoln‘s per-theater average, $24,364 on Friday, could well reach $75,000 by Sunday evening. If so, that’ll land Lincoln somewhere around the top 30 highest weekend per-theater averages ever

      • SLCain

        Money. Money. Money. If it makes money it must be good. You have the same morals as the pornographer and the drug-dealer, you swine.

        • JohnEngelman

          I was responding to Barrack Osama’s comment that the movie is likely to fail.

          Money is what the American free enterprise system is all about. Success is what America is all about. “Abraham Lincoln” is an excellent movie by Steven Spielberg. Expect his next movie to be entitled “Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.”

          • Gracchus123

            “Money is what the American free enterprise system is all about.”

            Actually, it is about liberty. Money (wealth) is merely a by-product.

          • JohnEngelman

            Abraham Lincoln liberated the slaves.

          • Gracchus123

            I, and no one I know, supports slavery. What’s your point?

          • Michael_C_Scott

            Only southern slaves.

          • JohnEngelman

            The Thirteenth Amendment, which “Lincoln” is about, freed all the slaves.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            Except those who were imprisoned, which I was.

            I still write to a guy who got 37 years for being stabbed in the neck by his ex-girlfriend.

            You don’t know anything at all, do you?

          • JohnEngelman

            The Thirteenth Amendment

            Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

            Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[2]


            Is it necessary for me to point out that the Thirteenth Amendment specifically
            authorizes prison for convicted criminals?

          • JohnEngelman

            The Thirteenth Amendment

            Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

            Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


            The Thirteenth Amendment specifically authorizes prison for convicted criminals.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            No, it expressly authorizes slavery for convicted criminals.

          • SLCain

            Yes, and that will likely be a pack of half-truths and lies too.

          • JohnEngelman

            Where did Stephen Spielberg lie in “Abraham Lincoln?”

          • SLCain

            I have not seen the movie, nor will I. According to the review, the entire introduction to the film is a lie. The fact that Lincoln believed blacks to be inferior and sought for them to emigrate after the war, the fact that this is never mentioned about Lincoln, is, by omission, tantamout to a lie. As if one made a movie about Hitler that only dealt his fondness for dogs and his interest in architecture.

    • JohnEngelman

      November 19, 2012–Spielberg’s “Lincoln,” which expanded to 1775 theaters nationwide on Friday, November 16, outpaced expectations by grossing over $21 million at the weekend box office.

      This is good news for serious dramatic pictures in a landscape dominated by spectacles and action-adventures.

      Last weekend, opening exclusively in 11 theaters nationwide, “Lincoln” pulled in a strong box office performance of just under $1 million. The film played in Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Toronto and Washington, D.C., and averaged a prodigious $85,846 per screen.

      The film, starring Daniel Day-Lewis, Sally Field, David Strathairn, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, James Spader, Hal Holbrook and Tommy Lee Jones, has grossed nearly $22.5 million in its first 10 days of release.

      “Lincoln” is a revealing drama that focuses on the 16th President’s tumultuous final months in office. In a nation divided by war and the strong winds of change, Lincoln pursues a course of action designed to end the war, unite the country and abolish slavery. With the moral courage and fierce determination to succeed, his choices during this critical moment will change the fate of generations to come.

      No doubt, “Lincoln” benefited from strong critical support: According to Rotten Tomatoes, the film received 90 percent positive reviews, many grading it giving it as an A ot A- film.

      • SLCain

        Movies based on comic books to well too. “Django Unchained”, Quentin Tarantino’s latest ultra-violent black revenge-fantasy will likely also do very well at the box office. What’s your point, Obama-voter?

        • JohnEngelman

          “Abraham Lincoln” is a great movie. Abraham Lincoln was our greatest and most loved president. Barack Obama was reelected. The Republican Party is on what is widely described as a “death spiral.”


          The America you love is gone with the wind. Get used to it.

        • JohnEngelman

          November 19, 2012–Spielberg’s “Lincoln,” which expanded to 1775 theaters nationwide on Friday, November 16, outpaced expectations by grossing over $21 million at the weekend box office.

          This is good news for serious dramatic pictures in a landscape dominated by spectacles and action-adventures.


          The reelection of Barack Obama was good news too. This movie came just in time.

          • heef

            “The reelection of Barack Obama was good news too. This movie came just in time.”

            The moderators need to grow a pair and get rid of this guy.

          • JohnEngelman

            The moderators get rid of those who post insults rather than facts and insights.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            They banished me quick-smart.

  • Petronius

    In the election campaign of 1860, Republican presidential candidate Abraham Lincoln did nothing to quiet the stream of Northern invective. When Northern agitators spoke of the South they imagined only gross cruelty and inequity; they saw only whips, chains, and Simon Legree. There was in their minds no room for accommodation, no possibility of conciliation. Most of all there was no awareness that their own obsessive demands for radical change served to promote bitterness and disorder, and at best would only substitute a new set of cruelties and inequities for the old.

    Their dehumanization of Southerners was by then so complete and thoroughgoing that it permeates and colors the Northern imagination and attitudes even unto the present day. The demonization of stereotyped Southerners remains an article of Northern faith––for Liberals, for the Democrat Party, for the mass media, for textbooks, for Steven Spielberg, Hollywood, and television, and also among influential Republicans, including former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, and among many conservatives as well.

    As the war progressed, with Northern defeats and casualties mounting, Northerners found it necessary to reach deeper into their ideological took kit, to reexamine their ideals and values, and to convince themselves that their sacrifices were being made for something greater than “the sacred Union,” indeed for the very highest ideals––for “a new birth of freedom,” to end slavery, for “the proposition that all men are created equal,” and even fighting a Holy War for God. The Union war dead were compared to countless Christs, whose rivers of blood would purify the land, atone for Southern sin, and cleanse America for her divinely appointed mission to redeem the world. In words that might have been spoken by John Brown, it was God’s will that “every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword.” And so Lincoln embarked on a war of unlimited objectives, a total war, a war without mercy, and the first ideological war of the industrial age.

    In the course of deploying overwhelming military force to destroy the Confederate States of America, Lincoln could not reasonably have hoped to achieve his avowed purpose of preserving the Union. For the thing he finally conquered bore no resemblance to the thing that he had sought to recover, but was rather a smoking ruin, a burned-out husk, inhabited by half-starved widows, orphans, and battle-scarred cripples, each of them unrepentant Rebels, and in the prophetic words of Edmund Burke, a thing greatly “depreciated, sunk, wasted, and consumed in the contest.” To preserve the Union, Lincoln had again and again been “obliged to depreciate the value of freedom itself.” Edmund Burke, Speech to Parliament on Conciliation with the Colonies (1775).

    And what of the “government of the people, by the people, for the people”? It was Lincoln who said it, but it was the Confederates who fought and died for it.

    • JohnEngelman

      During the New Deal the Federal Writers’ Project made recordings of over 2,300 first person accounts of elderly blacks who remembered what it was like to be slaves. Some of the accounts were of cruelty and hardship. Other accounts were of mutual affection and respect. One woman said, “I do not know about others, but for my mother, my father, and me slavery was a mighty good thing.”

      A man said that when former slaves were asked by their former owner to return to the plantation to work as free laborers, “Some were so glad to be back they cried.”

      A woman said that the white woman who owned her was her best friend throughout life.


      Cruel masters existed, but slaves were too expensive for anyone but a mentally deranged fool to mistreat.

      • i am

        “Cruel masters existed, but slaves were too expensive for anyone but a mentally deranged fool to mistreat.”

        This is what I tell people all the time who think that slave owners just walked around all day whipping their slaves. It makes no sense to whip a slave for no reason. It is like whipping a horse or ox. Slaves owners were responsible for their slaves action. If their slave damaged someone’s property, the slave owner had to pay.

        What percentage of slaves were whipped? Less than the percentage of blacks in jail today for committing crimes.

        Where whites whipped? Yessum sir.

        • JohnEngelman

          Most blacks benefit from some form of benevolent paternalism. Many of them seem to want it. Slavery was not a good way of achieving it. Nevertheless, most blacks do not benefit from “freedom,” whether the word is defined by the American Civil Liberties Union or the Libertarian Party.

        • JohnEngelman

          Laws existed in the South to protect slaves from excessive discipline. In addition, in Southern law a man’s slaves were considered to be an extension of his family. Thus, slaves could and sometimes did inherit money and property from their owners.

          Once I read that the grandfather of Thomas “Hitman” Hearns owned a farm his grandfather inherited from the plantation owner who had owned him before emancipation.

    • Gracchus123

      For a different perspective on St. Lincoln, read Thomas DiLorenzo’s book, THE REAL LINCOLN.

  • pcmustgo

    “Someone remarks that the Confederates “want to take slavery even into South America.” The Spanish brought black slaves to the New World more than 100 years before the first slaves appeared in the British colonies, and slavery wasn’t abolished in Cuba until 1886 and Brazil in 1888. But who cares about the real story?”

    Yeah, and it wasn’t banned in Saudi Arabia until 1962 (ahem, Malcolm X, Nation of Islam) and it appears to have never been banned in Africa or Haiti.

    Oh yeah, and Africans were involved in selling these slaves and the muslims had a slave trade there before the whites ever came. Oh, and only 1% of white americans owned slaves. But who cares about details?

    This is how it’s taught and this is why newly arrived russian and polish immigrants are expected to apologize for slavery. IT’S OUR “ORIGINAL SIN” … AND YOU KNOW WHAT BOB DYLAN AND CONDONLEEZA RICE ARE SAYING WHEN THEY SAY THAT…. that it’s apology time, but we will never be forgiven. It’s “our” sin. It’s “your” sin and it’s “my” sin and every other “white” person’s sin. We owe them. And you know who them is.

    • pcmustgo

      oh, yeah and Muslims and Africans don’t have to feel sorry for the sin of slavery, their historical involvement. JUST WHITES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! JUST “WHITE” PEOPLE

  • George Manuelian

    Another rewriting of history by Hollywood run by the tribe.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    Menchen on the Gettysburg Address: “Poetry, not logic”

    “But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination— ‘that government of the people, by the people, for the people,’ should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue.

    “The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i.e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle free; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and veto of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that veto was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely more liberty, in the political sense, than so many convicts in the penitentiary.” — Journalist H.L. Mencken, From “Five Men at Random,” “Prejudices: Third Series,” 1922, pp. 171-76: First printed, in part, in the “Smart Set,” May, 1920, p. 141

    • MikeofAges

      Lincoln at Gettysburg argued that the fate of self-determination worldwide was at stake in the conflict, which he described as a test of “whether that nation [the one founded fourscore and twenty years before] or any nation so conceived and dedicated” could survive, then or in the future. Any nation. Through this argument, Lincoln proposed the the American Civil War therefore was the utterest fulcrum of world history, and the battle at Gettysburg the very hinge of the world’s fate then and forever after.

      Hard to say he was not right in many ways. but every idea has it limits. How much effort have we, the United States of America, put forth to make this ideal universal? A lot. Two world wars, two or more cold wars, at least five land wars in Asia, and incessant campaigns against non-European insurgents and non-governmental forces around the world whom we have deemed hostile to universal democracy. Maybe it is time to admit that Lincoln’s thesis cannot be applied to every community, people or nation on the earth. We act like we have to make Lincoln’s thesis (and Woodrow Wilson’s) apply everywhere, or die trying. Some, even some liberals and leftists, think we have already. Died trying, that is to say.

  • Unperson

    In the article’s final photo, seated on the left — is that Ted Kennedy?

    • IstvanIN

      He is passed out drunk!

      • Gracchus123

        “Dreams of my Island.”

  • Seb

    Lincoln, a tyrant who didn’t like blacks is now cemented in the minds of Uhmericans as a freedom-loving negrophile.

    Blacks, who were/are not known for bravery in combat, intelligence, or what most people would call “virtues”, are ceaselessly portrayed as valiant PhD super-warriors.

    Who will answer for the lies foisted on our generation?

  • “He who controls the present controls the past. He who controls the past controls the future”. Orwell.

    “And when will we get a realistic, multifaceted black character in a movie, instead of the constant stream of sinless, chocolate-hued demigods?

    Most movies today contain a stock character I refer to as ‘da sassy black man’. He’s usually played by Chris Rock, Chris Tucker, or Eddie Murphy.

    It’s an obvious stereotype which blacks seem to embrace.

    • Screamin_Ruffed_Grouse

      The closest I’ve seen to accurate portrayals of blacks would be the largely braindead thugs on FX’s “The Shield” & HBO’s “The Wire.”

  • jack ryan

    I am proud that American Renaissance has not falled down in to paranoid, anti Semitic Jew hatred. That said, Jewish domination of Hollywood, the American mass media is a big problem. Orthodox religious Jews will argue that Hollywood media “powers that be” like Steven Spielberg aren’t really Jewish, because they are not religious Jews, instead they are just Liberals/Leftists, anti White. Does anyone have any constructive suggestions about how to address this problem in a non hateful way?

    • JohnEngelman

      What problem? The United States is a free country. Steven Spielberg has the right to make his movies. You have the right not to see them. I utilized my right to see “Abraham Lincoln,” and think it is an excellent movie.

      • David Ashton

        People have the right not to watch subtle anti-white pro-miscegenation propaganda, and to expose it, but not the money-power, media-influence or cinema-outlet controls, to make it or deliver it on any scale.

        • JohnEngelman

          So what would you do? Deny Steven Spielberg the ability to make movies that have critical and financial successes? How would that differ from people who try to prevent Jared Taylor from holding American Renaissance conferences?

          • David Ashton

            NO. I believe in free speech all round. Don’t put words in my mouth. But some people have acquired more power to push pernicious ideas than others have to compete with them. The social problem is that although an individual can choose not to swallow lies about his history, or watch porn, or take drugs, other people do so on a scale that makes life unpleasant for the individual dissenter.

          • JohnEngelman

            Abraham Lincoln has long been one of the most revered figures in American history, if not the most revered. This movie will certainly reinforce that, but when I watched it I did not see anything pernicious at all.

            I would like for someone to tell me what the movie said about Abraham Lincoln that is not true.

          • 5n4k33y35

            I appreciate some of your comments which are quite contrary to the contemporary “political correctness” ideology.

            However, I was wary of this movie because of the black social pressure on everyone to cater to their collective racial prestige, especially since Barack Obama has been in power, but for decades before as well.

            It is not any particular plot twist which puts me off, but the artistic license he takes and the creative flourishes which convey antipathy for the gentile white society.

            Progressive Jews tend to thrive on the idea they are exempt from the condemnations of gentile white society. Jews tending to be widely distributed among various host cultures have long had a high degree of involvement with international finance.

            Perhaps Spielberg would be put off by a historical documentary focusing the role of Jewish financiers in the incitement of war, profiteering from war, and profiting from human exploitation and bondage throughout history.

            I don’t have a bias against Jewish society, but I sure don’t appreciate progressive Jews always trying to throw the gentile white society under the bus. This tendency among progressive Jews has increased ever since Barack Obama was elected.

            I understand progressive blacks put a lot of coercive pressure on Jews in media, academia and government to be more vindictive in their condemnation of the gentile white society.

            Based on this movie review, it seems there were some creative flourishes added by Spielberg to sweeten the movie for progressive blacks and to embitter any gentile whites who are not vehemently condemning their own society already.

          • JohnEngelman


            Thank you for your comments. I did not see anything in the movie that was anti-white at all.

          • 5n4k33y35

            Really? Nothing at all which could be construed as irrelevant to historical accuracy, unnecessary for plot development, and costly to the prestige of white society?

            Negotiation with a Jew is rarely settled by the first round. Not that I consider it tedious. As long as we’re not talking in circles.

            I don’t find it necessary to impugn Stephen Spielberg with any suspicion of nefarious intentions. It’s just that the whole progressive cause was a bad idea from its very inception, and secular Jews are central to the advancement of that cause.

            I seek no scapegoats, and when I am ridiculing people, I often ridicule them among their chosen company so that they don’t feel singled out. The black / Jew / Feminist alignment has been fairly consistent my whole life, so I like to ridicule them as a set.

            Did you notice any part of the movie which was a socially responsible message promoting Feminism? That is all I see missing from this production.

          • JohnEngelman

            Nope. Nothing at all.

          • dfdf

            Ban this troll!!!

          • Michael_C_Scott

            No; let him hoist by his own petard.

          • David Ashton

            I haven’t seen this particular film. But I have seen or read reviews of a considerable number which in my view push an agenda detrimental to the reputation and interests of white people, especially those of them who are Christians. There are a number of studies on leftist, Zionist and grossly pornographic themes which excessively engage Hollywood people, who nevertheless have the money to promote them and to secure excessively favorable puffs in the media. Movies can create and pervert taste, as well as exploit it. Fashions are made or pushed by fashion houses, so to speak. As we say in England, “Where there’s muck, there’s money.”

          • JohnEngelman

            There were a few obscene words which I thought were uncalled for, but otherwise there was nothing pornographic. There was no nudity, and no sex.

          • David Ashton

            Not in this film maybe. But there are many more, and it is especially noticeable with the endlessly recycled US repeats on UK TV. The situation has hardly improved since Michael Medved’s “Hollywood versus America” (1992).

          • JohnEngelman

            Michael Medved’s argument is that G and PG rated movies are usually more profitable than R rated movies, but over half of Hollywood movies are R rated, because they reflect the decadent values of Hollywood.

            It makes sense to me. I do not like obscene words, and do not think they are ever necessary.

          • SLCain

            “I would like for someone to tell me what the movie said about Abraham Lincoln that is not true.”

            More like, what they didn’t say about him that IS true – the fact that, by modern standards, he would be a race-realist and a segregationist.

            Do you enjoy being a propaganda shill, Mr. Engelman?

          • JohnEngelman

            The purpose of this movie was to present a positive portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. The movie succeeded brilliantly. Expect this movie to sweep the Oscars.

            On this issue I am both mainstream, and traditional. The percentage of Americans who have your attitude about Abraham Lincoln is an insignificant minority, and it has been for over a century.

          • SLCain

            On this issue, you are wrong. You are wrong about a lot of things, yet don’t seem to care. Sounds like the definition of a nitwit to me.


          • Gracchus123

            “Expect this movie to sweep the Oscars. ”

            So? So Hollywood knows how to pat itself on the back. So what??

          • dfdf

            “I would like for someone to tell me what the movie said about Abraham Lincoln that is not true.”

            I’ll remember that when someone makes a movie about Hitler and ignores that thing called the second world war. “Well, he was a talented painter. I’m still waiting for someone to tell me what’s not true here.”

          • Gracchus123

            The “media” has committed “sins of omission” about Lincoln since 1865. Honesty about Lincoln would be a good start for Spielberg/Hollywood.

            I’ll not hold my breath. The word Obtuse keeps rattling around in my skull.

          • JohnEngelman

            No body is perfect. Abraham Lincoln is generally considered, both by the general population, and historians, as one of the two or three greatest presidents in American history.

          • Gracchus123

            “Abraham Lincoln is generally considered, both by the general population, and historians, as one of the two or three greatest presidents in American history.”

            That statement is proof that propaganda works very well. The adage “the winners write the history books” comes to mind.

          • JohnEngelman

            For propaganda to be effective two conditions must be met. First, the propaganda must be what people want to believe. Second, those presenting the propaganda must be able to suppress opposing viewpoints.

            Those who regret the emancipation of the slaves may want to believe that Abraham Lincoln was evil, or at least morally flawed. Those who agree with me that he was one of our two greatest presidents have not suppressed the view of those who disagree.

            Abraham Lincoln’s greatness is the informed consensus of those who are able to examine all of the evidence, and it is the settled opinion of the vast majority of Americans, including many whites in the South.

            Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves, reunited the Union, and pointed the United States in the direction that lead it to become the strongest and richest country in the world.

            If the Civil War had not been fought slavery might still exist. If the Confederacy had won the Civil War the United States would not have been able to defeat twentieth century totalitarianism.

            If a victorious Confederacy had eventually freed the slaves, they would have been restricted to a second class citizenship more constraining than Jim Crow Legislation. A civil rights movement in the Confederacy would have been crushed with executions and long prison sentences. I cannot imagine Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. giving his “I Have a Dream” speech on the steps of the Jefferson Davis Memorial in Richmond, Virginia.

          • Gracchus123

            “First, the propaganda must be what people want to believe.” Utter nonsense.

            “If the Civil War had not been fought slavery might still exist.” Utter nonsense.

            “If a victorious Confederacy had eventually freed the slaves, they would have been restricted to a second class citizenship more constraining than Jim Crow Legislation.” And your point is??

            “If the Confederacy had won the Civil War what remained of the United States would not have been able to defeat twentieth century totalitarianism.”

            Utter conjecture. Your crystal ball needs some polishing.

          • Ragu

            “If the Confederacy had won the Civil War what remained of the United
            States would not have been able to defeat twentieth century

            Please. Had the Confederacy won, the second world war likely would not have occurred because the United States would not have intervened in the first – tipping the balance.

            “If the Civil War had not been fought slavery might still exist.”

            Please. No one can really be that thick.

            This guy once stated that he lived in San Fransisco and has been robbed by blacks multiple times. This has to be a lie. He must be either a subversive troll or an ADL plant. San Fransisco has a black population of only about 6% – less than half the national average. Does anyone really believe that crap about him being robbed? Multiple times? In a fantastically rich city?

            He posts generic comments about blacks here and there (so he won’t be banned), then tries to undermine every important story. He even sometimes suggests stories, waits for people to post, and then tries to undermine the story he suggested himself. What does that tell you?

          • JohnEngelman

            I lived in San Jose, California with impoverished Vietnamese war refuges. I was never a victim of Vietnamese crime because Orientals have a very low crime rate.

          • deffe

            “So what would you do? Deny Steven Spielberg the ability to make movies that have critical and financial successes?”

            Just shut up and get lost troll. Your friends at the ADL and SPLC do exactly that all the time. Fair is fair pal. You once stated that “jews don’t play fair.” Well, the same to you. Ban it.

          • JohnEngelman

            I support the Anti-Defamation League because I love Jews, Judaism, and Israel.

            I have criticized the Southern Poverty Law Center a number of times on this website.

          • David Ashton

            The successive revelations of your real thoughts are like peeling an onion.

          • Gracchus123

            The emerging portrait is interesting to say the least.

      • Gracchus123

        It may well be a good “movie”. The problem with a movie such as LINCOLN is that many, many Americans will see the movie as historical fact and will never know the truth about Lincoln and that period in American history. These same Americans will get a false impression about the role that blacks played during that period of American history. Additionally, many blacks who see this movie will be further incensed about the racial issues between blacks and Whites in this country.

        All of these things are wrong about the movie.

        None of these things are lost on those who made this movie.

        • JohnEngelman

          Abraham Lincoln is one of the most revered figures in American history. What did the movie say that it not true?

          • Gracchus123

            I have not seen the movie and have no intention of seeing it. I have read many books about Lincoln, and know all I need to know about him.

            I do not revere him. He was a politician. I revere virtually no politician.

          • 5n4k33y35

            The movie omitted the fact that Lincoln wanted to send blacks elsewhere after abolishing slavery. Apparently, Abe Lincoln was also a white supremacist in addition to being an abolitionist.

            Simple minded people have been misinformed to believe such a contradiction would be impossible.

          • JohnEngelman

            At the beginning of the Civil War Lincoln was not an abolitionist. His primary concern was in preserving the Union. The Emancipation Proclamation was signed in order to keep European countries from intervening on the side of the Confederacy, and in order to encourage blacks to enlist in the Union Army.

            An omission is not a lie. The movie would only have been dishonest if it portrayed Lincoln as a man who had for years dedicated his life to the abolition of slavery.

          • Gracchus123

            “An omission is not a lie.”

            If I told you that Mr. X gave $5million dollars to charity, but failed to tell you that Mr. X got that money from the White sex-slave trade in which he was deeply engaged, would you consider me an honest broker?

          • ralph jones

            Is there(1) a definitive history of the focus upon, and the efforts at pilot projects involving, the re-settlement of Blacks into areas outside of the U.S.
            and (2) a detailed account of Lincoln’s interest in, and involvements with,
            this issue??

          • Levi Dogesby

            The movie showed Lincoln as one of the only whites standing up for blacks and in favor of ending slavery. In reality, Lincoln offered to readmit the Southern states and allow them to defeat the 13th Amendment. There is much, much more in the movie which was twisted in favor of this simplistic narrative. Rather than list it all here, I invite you to read some history books for yourself and overcome your laughable ignorance!

          • JohnEngelman

            The movie did not tell the whole truth, but it told the truth.

          • Levi Dogesby

            The movie told a lot of truth, but the deliberate lie quotient makes it subversive and evil. And an insult to the men who fought in the Civil War.

          • The Traveler

            You and your ADL friends in San Francisco should seriously consider finding another site to troll. It is hardly the things that were said in the movie that are the problem, but the inconvenient facts that were ignored.

          • JohnEngelman

            Abraham Lincoln is one of the most loved and respected figures in American history. That should not even be controversial here.

          • SLCain

            You are a bloviating ass. THAT is certainly not controversial here.

          • JohnEngelman

            You have nothing of value to contribute: no facts, no insights, only insults.

          • SLCain

            No, you poppinjay, YOU have nothing of value to contribute. And you deserve nothing but insults.

          • JohnEngelman

            I am a race realist who agrees nearly entirely with Professor J. Philippe Rushton’s “RACE, EVOLUTION, AND BEHAVIOR.”


            You are a race bigot who hates anyone who is not a white Gentile of European descent, and anyone like me who does not share your hatred.

          • Gracchus123

            That “Eric Hoffer” statement makes no sense. Sounds good on the surface, but is it true?

          • JohnEngelman

            Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer” attributes fanatical political beliefs to a loss or lack of self esteem. At times he seems to explain all mass movements including new religions this way, but here he overstates his case.

            When I study the origins of Christianity, Islam, and Mormonism I see men becoming prominent who otherwise would not have, but I do not see them as failures in earlier endeavors.

            Adolf Hitler failed as an artist and an architect before he turned to politics. Joseph Goebbels failed as a novelist.

            I first read “The True Believer” when I was attending what was called “The Socialist Summer School.” This was sponsored by the Socialist Workers’ Party. SWP was a Trotskyist organization. We would read a pamphlet on a political problem, and get together every week and discuss it.

            After reading “The True Believer” I noticed that most of the SWP members had failed in their efforts to become doctors or lawyers.

          • David Ashton

            More and more revelations – I too read Hoffer’s book (and quite a bit of Trotsky too) but did not need to join the Trots to do so.

          • JohnEngelman

            I am a fairly traditional Democrat who leans left on economic and environmental issues, and right on social issues.

            Unlike most Democrats I think genes are considerably more important than anything else in determining not only ability levels, but also personality and character.

            I like talking to you, David Ashton. If I could give you my e-mail address without posting it we could continue this conversation offline.

          • David Ashton

            Thank you, but I am honestly far too busy and not in the best of health to be led into temptation. Debate on this site is my only “relaxation” and I prefer others to judge any contest between your “truth” and my comments.
            “People will never look forward to posterity who never look back to their ancestors” (Edmund Burke).

          • JohnEngelman

            Edmund Burke is one of my favorite political philosophers. Like him I am pessimistic about human nature and potential. I think there is often wisdom in tradition. I distrust abrupt social and economic changes.

          • David Ashton

            Well, we’ll see what you think when Obama has finished his term.

          • JohnEngelman

            I will not be sorry Mitt Romney lost. I have long been sorry that Barack Obama did not fill FDR’s shoes, but that was much to expect of anyone.

          • Gracchus123

            That statement is controversial for people who look more deeply into historical figures than Wikipedia offers. I’ll bet you revere FDR as well. Of course you would since he employed many of your fellow travelers.

          • JohnEngelman

            I consider Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt to be America’s two greatest presidents. I also admire Thomas Jefferson and Teddy Roosevelt. They are our two greatest Democrats and our two greatest Republicans.

          • Gracchus123

            No surprise there. Interesting though, since FDR was an American Patrician if ever one existed. He abhorred the common man. But since he was the advocate of socialist ideas, ok in your book.

          • JohnEngelman

            I doubt seriously that Franklin Roosevelt “abhorred the common man.”

            That abhorrence is what Mitt Romney expressed when he dismissed 47 percent of the American population being takers and parasites.

          • Gracchus123

            Actually Romney was simply stating a fact. FDR, as I said, was a Patrician who claimed he could trace his ancestry back to a Roman emperor. Of course, his ancestors go no further back than any other living person. 🙂

          • David Ashton

            Who was your President who could write Latin and Greek simultaneously with his hands, and the one who “couldn’t walk and chew gum at the same time”? I think I remember who said there needs to be “a wholesale effort against racial profiling, which is illiterate children”. It never seems to get better as the generations go by.

          • David Ashton

            “The laboring people are poor only because they are numerous” (Burke). Discuss.

          • JohnEngelman

            That is certainly a factor. It is why I welcome the decline in the birth rate in countries where it is happening, and why I favor easy access to birth control methods. I also favor legal abortion, although I do not like it.

            For as long as perhaps 40,000 years there has been a tension between human population growth, scarcity, and technical advances.

            Before 40,000 years ago, when game animals became scarce, humans starved, allowing the population of game animals to grow again.

            With the invention of the spear thrower, and later on the invention of the bow and arrow it became possible to hunt smaller, faster animals as the larger animals were hunted to extinction.

            The human population grew. As the smaller faster animals became scarce agriculture began. The development of urban civilization made agriculture more efficient. The human population continued to grow.

            The industrial revolution made possible the manufacture of cheaper consumer goods, and ever more efficient methods of agriculture. The human population continued to grow.

            One can explain the relationship between population, technology, resources, and standard of living with the following equation:

            (natural resources x level of technology) / human population = average standard of living

            However, a growing population benefits those who are wealthy. More people mean more consumers, and more job applicants. By the law of supply and demand this means higher prices, lower wages, and higher profits.

            That is why I disagree with those who advocate a higher birth rate for whites. I advocate a lower birth rate for Hispanics and blacks.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            No, he is not. My favorite is Theodore Roosevelt.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            Theodore Roosevelt.

  • Nicholai Hel

    I’ll skip this one. Though I’m anxiously awaiting the Spielberg produced, Joe McCarthy: Vampire Hunter.

    • JohnEngelman

      McCarthy was the vampire.

    • David Ashton

      He would be the Vampire. The reds he unearthed or failed to unearth would be poor, innocent, freedom-loving creatures. We have already had an Ed Murrow film repeating several lies about the Senator. Revenge of the Hollywood Ten – or ten thousand.

  • MikeofAges

    You poor ding-dongs. You just don’t know how constitutional amendment work in the world of progressive-Popular Front political mythology. Breakthrough amendments are somehow passed to advance the causes of people who otherwise are universally reviled. Never mind that they have to be approved by 2/3 of each house of congress and ratified by 3/4 of the states. The foremost example undoubtedly is the 19th Amendment which gave the vote to women. If you listened to the political left, you would think this amendment had been adopted over a phalanx of opposition. Yet it had to get that 2/3 vote in both houses and get ratified by 36 of the 48 states. That it was ratified quickly means that there was not the massive opposition postulated by your local leftist professors and activists. More likely, there were a few states which stood opposed while the rest firmly supported the idea. Round up the usual suspects!

  • danlieb7

    This is a well made movie. I’m glad to learn that the director and producer is Jewish – Steven Spielberg. The lead actor Daniel Day Lewis is Jewish too and so is the lead actress Sally Fields, whose mother Margaret Fields was Jewish. This is a proud day as an Israeli American to see my fellow Jews shine for the Oscars next year.


    I have a lot of respect for President Abraham Lincoln. He is still one of my heroes and I always cheered the Union states defeating the evil intent of the southern confederate states. The south fell and will never rise again! Thank goodness! Shalom 🙂

  • Tim_in_Indiana

    The still from the film looks really great. Obviously this was a big-budget picture. Unfortunately, the period settings are the only thing about the film that looks authentic. I never expected a historically accurate picture of Lincoln to come out of Hollywood, and certainly not in this era. What a waste.

  • Joe WEbb

    take a little time and watch Black TV programs and movies made for Blacks. Don’t watch with your kids.

    I surfed past one a few nights ago. Scene is comic, 3 or 4 Black men preparing a turkey . The main dude puts on rubber gloves. Straight man asks what the rubber gloves are for. Main dude says, ” yo..ya never knows who this turkey been with.”

    Another one I surfed past a couple months ago had Dad checking out son watching TV or video. Dad. ” what’s that you are watching? O that guy’s ass looks familiar…O that’s my ass…O that’s ….where’d you git that video?” Mom and DAd in primal scene.

    You cannot make up these kinds of things…but Blacks can.

    • Take a little time to watch black TV shows and movies made for blacks. Be prepared to feel your brain cells dying one by one while you do it, their media are that mind-numbingly dumb and slow. Better that you should kill your own brain cells with some high quality hard liquor.

  • SLCain

    Spielberg is a very good film director, who – unfortunately – is a very doctrinaire Hollywood liberal.

    By the way, the writer of both “Lincoln” and “Munich” is Tony Kushner, a homosexual activist, and author of the gay propaganda play “Angels in America”. He has spent his entire adult life subverting normal, traditional western culture.

    • IstvanIN

      and most importantly Jewish.

    • John L.

      There are allot of these Tony Kushner types in the Media and Entertainment. Someone was talking about the Gay presence in the C.B.C. and B.B.C. Hollywood is pretty obvious. It has been like this for a while. No wonder I have been increasingly uncomfortable culturally speaking. I grew up in the 60’s with regular American culture (compared to now).

    • IstvanIN

      Tony Kushner’s ethnicity has a bigger impact on his view points than his homosexuality. Sorry, but that is the truth.

      • 5n4k33y35

        There is movement among conservative Jews away from progressive ideology. I’m assuming he is a Jew. Progressive Jews have an influence which results in unenviable circumstances for the societies in which they live.

        That’s why East Asians are happy they don’t have any and they don’t want them either. Only a hard right turn by conservative Jews can change the reputation for promoting degenerate ideology which their progressive brethren are reinforcing.

    • Gracchus123

      Would you call him a cultural Marxist?

  • Alexander

    I’m surprised no one mentioned until now that Abraham Lincoln may have been a slavery abolitionist, but he was at the same time also a racist obsessed with preventing miscegenation.

    It’s a pretty known fact, outside of the USA that is, which is quite funny and weird.

    No doubt that Steven “Spielberg” will want to make Lincoln appear as someone he wasn’t, i.e. a bleeding-heart humanist, to reinforce in the minds of the masses the notion that the Civil War was part of the logical evolution of mankind toward progressivism, and that no one in their rights minds could morally side with the South.

    • David Smith

      I am amazed that AR seems to treat as “sidebar” Lincoln’s persistent interest in the re-settlement (re colonization) of American Blacks and his (stenographically recorded) remarks in 1862 to small delegation of Blacks he received at the White House–all indicate he shared the prevailing view of his time of Blacks being inherently mentally inferior to Whites and that he wished to have them (voluntarily) removed from the U.S. to the extent that their numbers would present no enduring political complication.

  • JohnEngelman

    Before and after the Civil War the South produced the best cotton and tobacco in the world at the lowest prices. If calmer heads had prevailed in the South the slave owners would have freed their slaves, paid them wages, and there would have been no war. The slave owners brought the war on themselves. Non slave owning whites in the South were fools to fight for an institution that kept their wages lower than they would have been in the free states.

    • Anonymouse

      You must not be from around here.

      You’re forgetting states’ right. We *all* lost when states’ rights were thrown under the bus by Lincoln and his ilk.

      The South did *not* bring this on themselves. The South (despite the contemporary media’s portrayal of us) was filled with statesmen and gentlemen. Lest ye forget, Virginia is home to more presidents than any other state.

      • Gracchus123

        The war between the States, is viewed by many as a fight to end slavery in America. That notion was foisted on the public to make the war a “noble cause” when, in fact, it was a “Noble LIe”. The war was to prevent the southern States from exercising their constitutional right to separate from the voluntary union of the States. In the process of preventing this voluntary separation, the North killed forever the sovereignty of the various States and brought into being the all-powerful central government we now enjoy.

        • JohnEngelman

          The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution…

          Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [than “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”], its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

          – Vice President of the Confederacy Alexander H. Stephens, from his “Cornerstone Speech,” given March 21, 1861 at Savannah, Georgia

          • Gracchus123

            Vice Presidents are notorious for saying stupid things. The name Joe Biden comes to mind.

          • JohnEngelman

            “Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.”

            – Vice President Dick Cheney

      • JohnEngelman

        Americans move around so frequently that states rights is an obsolete concept.

        • Gracchus123

          Moving around has nothing to do with States’ rights.

          • Moving around could be the essence of states’ rights. That sound you here is all the potheads, feet don’t fail them now toward Colorado and Washington State.

          • Gracchus123

            Point taken. But my response to Engelman meant that the fact of people moving from one state to another in no way negates a State’s ability to exercise its rights as a sovereign state, that is to say, the 10th amendment is still alive. States simply don’t exercise it as much as they should, and that has nothing to do with people moving around.

          • SLCain

            You may as well taking this “Engelman” guy seriously. By his own admission, he voted for Barack Obama in the last election. He is not on our side.

          • David Ashton

            I sometimes wonder if he is himself a bit of a “Cultural Marxist” – without the “cultural”.

          • Gracchus123

            The term “fellow traveller” comes to mind. And, some people wear that label proudly. It seems to me that it is the “neverendingconflict”. The battle between the “makers and the takers”.

          • Gracchus123

            Oh, I know very well the game Engelman is playing. Can you spell t-r-o-l-l?
            However, I feel compelled, from time to time, to correct some of his most egregious errors of omission and commission; some people on this board may be misled by his “wikipedia posts”.

          • SLCain

            The bi-polar nature of his posts, sometimes as critical of politically correct fashions as any of us, sometimes trumpeting the same kind of triumphalist left-wing bilge that one might read at Slate or HuffPo or Democratic Underground, leads me to believe that this Engelman fellow is mentally disturbed.

          • Gracchus123

            I ‘ve noticed that some posts appear to be “acts of contrition” when the criticisms approach the boiling point.

          • heef

            That’s when he realizes that he’s gone too far. He has done so repeatedly and should be removed.

            He has posted the same thing to half a dozen people here. He is a troll.

          • Gracchus123

            Why remove him? At least he provides some entertainment. Also insight into the other side.

          • JohnEngelman

            My posts are fact based and calm. Yours are not.

          • SLCain

            Your posts are fact-based in the same way that Cheese-Whiz is cheese-based.

            Also, you routinely ignore points of objection that others bring up in response to you, and plow right on ahead expounding your deranged philosophy. In short, you argue in bad faith. Carrying out a conversation with you is like talking to an autistic mime.

            And by the way, far from being intemperate or un-calm, I have quite calmly called you out as an ass.

          • heef

            He is a subversive troll. I cannot believe people here are so dumb that they cannot see that. He does this kind of thing on purpose. His objective is to undermine. He may actually work for the SPLC or ADL. Think about it. The guy can quote Jared Taylor (he must be keeping notes) verbatim and name the article but yet is a left wing nut and undermines every story on this site. What does that tell you?

    • Frans

      You’re sadly misinformed if you still believe that whites fought to maintain slavery. They did not. Most whites in the south, most whites, did not own slaves. Only a small % of whites actually did own slaves. The war wasn’t fought to maintain slavery or to end slavery. That’s just the spin the government/Lincoln put on it so it would seem humanitarian in nature as opposed to its real purpose which was money and power.

  • JohnEngelman

    Address of the International Working Men’s Association to Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America

    Presented to U.S. Ambassador Charles Francis Adams
    January 28, 1865


    We congratulate the American people upon your re-election by a large majority. If resistance to the Slave Power was the reserved watchword of your first election, the triumphant war cry of your re-election is Death to Slavery.

    From the commencement of the titanic American strife the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class…

    The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world.

    – Karl Marx

    • David Ashton

      Good Old Marx!

      • JohnEngelman

        Karl Marx was mistaken about the Civil War initiating an era of ascendancy for the working class. Instead it initiated an era of ascendancy for the corporate elite.

        • David Ashton

          “Wipe America off the map and you will get anarchy, the complete decay of trade and modern civilization. But to do away with slavery would be to wipe America off the map.” – Karl Marx, Letter to P. V. Annenkov, 1846.
          “Above all, Marx did not know the United States.” – Edmund Wilson, “To the Finland Station” (1974 ed) p.326.

  • orange county

    Would anyone have predicted khazar Hollywood to produce anything any differently and only prove how the victors can write erase and rewrite a million times over their revisionist fiction when they have an agenda. One day in the not so distant future the history books for a non-white amerika will tell about how blacks founded the west and owned plantations worked by European white slaves who were all liberated in a civil war and this nation was always owned and controlled and led by Africans who were always the main players and led the world with their final black jesus Obama being the final messenger prophet before they all die and go to black heaven paradise. Actually they are all half black since full miscegenation would have made 500 million Baracks and whites would have long vanished from existence.
    Dont worry because we already see everything being turned upside down and revised.
    Victors always rewrite history. Didnt Hollywood’s Planet of the Apes in 1969 warn of coming events all the way down to the ape jesus messiah? And dont even mention King Kong and his love of blondes first made in 1939.

    Does Lincoln even look white or does he look like some mongoloid khazar breed? A new book is out now by a negro Harvard professor female called The Heningess of Monticello alleging again how Jefferson fucked the slave bitch and had many kids and they rule the world …. and of course how Amerika got the jump on the rest of the world with “equality” …
    Jefferson and Madison are both rotting and burning in hell it is hoped …

  • JohnEngelman
  • JohnEngelman

    The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution…

    Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea [than “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”], its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

    – Vice President of the Confederacy Alexander H. Stephens, from his “Cornerstone Speech,” given March 21, 1861 at Savannah, Georgia

    • David Ashton

      Read Nathaniel Weyl’s books on the Negro in American civilization.

      • JohnEngelman

        If you read them tell me what they say.

        • David Ashton

          Don’t be lazy. Read more widely – like Stalin and Mussolini.

          • dfdf

            …I’m sure he’s already read Stalin.

  • JohnEngelman

    The United States Constitution

    Article I

    Section 8

    1: The Congress shall have Power…

    15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

    • IstvanIN

      The south wanted to peacefully secede, the war was started by the north, thus there was no insurrection by the south.

      • JohnEngelman

        Until the Civil War became a war to end slavery the South probably had the better case legally. After the Emancipation Proclamation, the Confederacy certainly had the worst case morally.

        One should not idealize the antebellum South. The institution of slavery was harmful to the economic interests of the vast majority of Southern whites who could not afford slaves. Wages were higher in the North. There were more economic opportunities there.

        Abolitionist agitation, and even the ability of abolitionists to state their argument was illegal in the South. During the campaign of 1860 Abraham Lincoln was not allowed to campaign in the South. He was not on the ballot in Southern states during the election.

        The South had an oppressive, authoritarian society where intellectual freedom was denied in order to protect an evil institution.

        • IstvanIN

          The Emancipation Proclamation came after the formation of the CSA, was a political ploy, and should have had no legal affect on the south as a independent nation, and wouldn’t have if the south had won.

          • JohnEngelman

            Of course the Emancipation Proclamation would have been null and void if the Confederacy won. That was one of the reasons it was necessary for the Confederacy to lose.

          • SLCain

            Engelman is a socialist, and an advocate of white race replacement. He deserves only your derision, not your time. Don’t bother with this idiot.

          • David Ashton

            He keeps bobbing up – this has become the Engelman Renaissance site.

        • Gracchus123

          “The South had an oppressive, authoritarian society where intellectual freedom was denied in order to protect an evil institution.”

          How do you account for the ferocity with which the Sons of the South fought?

          • JohnEngelman

            I account for it the same way I account for the high black violent crime rate: too much testosterone and not enough brains. They were fools to fight for an institution that kept most of them poor.

          • Gracchus123

            They fought for “home and hearth”, not for preserving the institution of slavery. They were fighting for their friends and neighbors just as the Union soldiers were, just as all soldiers have always done. It had nothing to do with testosterone or brains. Note the Russian peasants who threw Hitler’s forces back during WWII; now there was an oppressive institution keeping “most of them poor”. Yet they fought brilliantly. Go figure.

          • IstvanIN

            I have actually read that some blacks fought for the CSA because they considered themselves citizens of their respective states and considered the North an invading foreign entity.

          • Gracchus123

            That is correct. Again, soldiers fight for home and hearth, kith and kin. Soldiers do not fight for politicians.

          • David Ashton

            Unfortunately politicians can send soldiers into battle on a false prospectus. We could ill afford to lose such fine young men on both sides in the two world wars and in Afghanistan today.

          • Gracchus123

            Huge blows to the White gene pool.

          • David Ashton

            Agree 100%

          • Michael_C_Scott

            My wife’s great-grandfather sank a US aircraft carrier, and I would do the same thing the same way.

  • curri

    Common sense when you get past the indoctrination:


    “Fighting an incredibly bloody war to save a union of states is like raping your wife (and, for that matter, killing your father-in-law) to save your marriage.”

  • NYB

    I hope this movie flops badly, for one very good reason.

    When a movie is out of step with the times, it gains notoriety. For example, John Wayne’s 1968 ‘Green Berets’ was labeled “jingo-istic” in its day by jaded audiences critical of a complex, contemporary war.

    Spielburg’s ‘Lincoln’ should be made to wear the badge of shame for our times. It’s infamy is that it is hopelessly stuck in vintage ‘civil rights’ rhetoric and plain lies.

    A new generation should be able to see through the worn, Hollywood leftist schlock .

    • JohnEngelman

      The New York Times October 17, 2012

      In a spring survey, 34 percent of likely young voters said they supported Mr. Romney, compared with 51 percent for Mr. Obama. The new survey, conducted from Sept. 19 to Oct. 3 and released on Wednesday, found that Mr. Romney’s level of support went to 36 percent, but that Mr. Obama’s support had grown to 55 percent.


      Huffington Post 12/29/11

      Young people — the collegiate and post-college crowd, who have served as the most visible face ofthe Occupy Wall Street movement — might be getting more comfortable with socialism. That’s the surprising result from a Pew Research Center poll that aims to measure American sentiments toward different political labels…

      socialism has more fans than opponents among the 18-29 crowd. Forty-nine percent of people in that age bracket say they have a positive view of socialism; only 43 percent say they have a negative view.


      I think this movie is going to do just fine with young people.

      • Gracchus123

        And this movie will reinforce the youngs’ reverence for the black man.

        • JohnEngelman

          We have to live together, so we might as well try to like each other.

          • SLCain

            I neither with to live around you, nor will I like you.

            You are a traitor to the cause espoused by this web-site

          • JohnEngelman

            Race realism requires a realistic assessment of racial differences. Orientals tend to be more intelligent than whites, more sexually responsible, and more law abiding. That is why I prefer them to whites, and especially to hate filled bigots like you.

          • SLCain

            You are an odious little swine. Who cares what you think.

          • Gracchus123

            For most “race realists” I know, hate is not part of the equation; realism is.

          • Orientals tend to be boring automatons with slanted eyes, humorless & good for perverted sex (females). The rest is your projection.

          • JohnEngelman

            Bardon Kaldian,

            The Orientals I have known as friends, neighbors, fellow students, and co-workers have been neither “boring automatons,” nor were they “humorless,” nor were the females “good for perverted sex.”

            Indeed, Oriental women are less prone to engage in sex outside of marriage than white women, and they are less prone to have illegitimate children than white women.

            In his “RACE, EVOLUTION, AND BEHAVIOR,” Professor J. Philippe Rushton, who spoke at six American Renaissance Conferences, has this to say of Oriental sexuality: “Orientals are the least sexually active, whether measured by age of first intercourse, intercourse frequency, or number of sexual partners. Blacks are the most active on all of these. Once again Whites are in between.”

            Low crime rates and high IQs for Orientals are not my projection. They are pointed out by Professor Rushton, and amply documented by every study of those splendid people that I have read.

          • Why do you think that Oriental cultures have the most developed erotic manuals, both India, China and Japan ? With perversions galore ? Which are put in practice when needed.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enjo_k%C5%8Dsai As for Chinese humor- it doesn’t exist. Their Daoist immortals- the example of radical absurdist humor- are nothing but annoying simpletons. Asians- look the same, behave the same, cannot tell one from another …boring.

          • JohnEngelman

            I guess you have never read the works of the Maquis de Sade, the Memoirs of Jacques Casanova, or Victorian pornography, with its emphasis on flagellation.

          • I did, and they’re literature (in many respects a good one). Chinese & Japanese are boring re erotic imagination; they’d produced only sex manuals-not imaginative literature- focused in various “techniques”, many of them pure S & M.Not creative even in that field.

          • JohnEngelman

            What matters is that Orientals tend to be more sexually responsible, more intelligent, and more obedient to the law than are whites. Those are facts that are not in serious dispute. By every criterion that whites are superior to blacks Orientals are superior to whites.

            Anything else is one’s subjective response to them. I have liked and admired them since childhood because of those facts, and because I have always had good experiences with the Orientals I have known.

          • In short- they’re boring. Responsible is one thing, boring completely another. But- that’s you. Similis simili gaudet.

          • Jerrybear

            Orientals have a slight intelligence edge when it comes to the general population. When it comes to people with very high IQs, Europeans vastly outnumber orientals. You’ll also have to explain away all the innovations created by white man that surpassed the Orientals by leaps and bounds. Thanks for the gunpowder though.

            Now, I don’t have anything against Orientals except that they vote overwhelmingly for Democrats and are natural statists even though they have a good work ethic and family values. So just like how neocons say Hispanics are ‘natural Republicans’, you would think Asians who are successful would gravitate to Republican party but they don’t. They are loyal robots to the state and we don’t need them.

          • DudeWheresMyCountry?

            “By every criterion that Whites are superior to blacks Orientals are superior to Whites.” By every criterion? Mr. Engleman you have again revealed yourself for making over-simplified arguments even you don’t believe. Please tell us how the technological achievement gap Whites have over Blacks is the same gap Orientals have technologically over Whites… or kindly eat your words.

          • JohnEngelman

            Orientals are catching up quickly. Where was your PC made? Mine is a Lenovo, made in China. For several decades the Japanese have made better televisions, radios and cars than the United States.

          • JohnEngelman

            Orientals are catching up quickly in technology. Where was your PC made? Mine was made in China. For several decades the Japanese have made better radios, televisions, and cars than Americans.

          • Gracchus123

            “Assembly” is not equatable to invention/innovation. Virtually all of the Chinese “catching up” is from industrial espionage of Western technology.

          • David Ashton

            A Sinophile companion of the CPUSA, Trotskyites and Vietniks in your younger days. Did you too wave the Little Red Book of inanities from Chairman Mao like other deluded revolting students?

          • JohnEngelman

            No, although I did read it.

            Although I read Karl Marx for insight, I was never a Marxist.

            The writers I were attracted to were Michael Harrington, I.F. Stone, and Bertrand Russell, among others on the democratic left. In retrospect I think that the War on Poverty, which Michael Harrington inspired, was a bad policy, although it was not dishonest and immoral like supply side economics.

            I am glad that the United States did not become more involved in the Chinese Civil War between the Communists and the Nationalists. Nevertheless, I think that the government of Taiwan is superior to that on the mainland.

            China’s misfortune, and that of the world, is that after the death of Sun Yat Sen in 1925 no leader of his moral stature rose to govern the Chinese. Mao Tse Tung and Chaing Kai Shek were dictators who valued personal power more than the good of the Chinese people.

          • David Ashton

            I am not well acquainted with the American authors, but supposed that Izzy Stone was more indulgent towards Marxism-Leninism than Mike Harrington. Will world socialism come? The communist revivalists think so.

            1. I do have Harrington’s interesting and valuable “The Accidental Century” (1965).

            2. “No sense denying I.F. Stone was a Soviet Agent”, Commentary, January 1970.

            3. Bertrand Russell, a brilliant mathematician and philosopher, who had contemplated atom bombing Moscow and a decade later led our unilateral nuclear disarmament campaign, once asserted that the “problems raised by nuclear energy are not such that a politician’s training enables him to understand” – unlike the student of “theoretical physics”.

            “Surely it is nonsense to suggest that no-one else understands what happens when you drop an H-bomb except a physicist….For once Lord Russell talked the purest essence of nonsense. As Aristotle remarked to King Alexander when his royal pupil caught him in a most embarrassing position: ‘Your Majesty will observe how passion can debase even the most exalted intellect’.” (Oswald Mosley, April 1958)

            Still they don’t make ’em quite like that any more, not even in China.

            4. Mao & Chiang: so the Chinese were not that clever, at any rate in the political sphere. And as for US interference, read Anthony Kubek’s “How the Far East was Lost” (1963/71).

          • JohnEngelman

            During the 1950s I.F.Stone visited the Soviet Union. It has been years since I have read his accounts, but he was critical of what he observed. Shortly before returning to the United States he write in his Weekly that he was aware that some of his readers were disappointed that he was not more positive. Then he wrote – I am fairly confident these were his exact words – “This is not a good society, and it is not run by honest men.” He wrote those words in italics.

          • David Ashton

            Agent “Pancake” had a taste of reality in his later years.

          • JohnEngelman

            I.F. Stone condemned the Nonaggression Pact between Hitler and Stalin. He condemned the Soviet Crushing of the Hungarian Uprising. He condemned the Soviet suppression of the democracy movement in Czechoslovakia in 1968.

            It is reasonable to assume that at other times he was a Communist sympathizer. Unless it can be proven that he accepted money from the Soviet Union, and passed classified information to the KGB, that is not a matter of legitimate concern. He was an independent thinker who did not take sides in the Cold War.

          • David Ashton

            Gosh, he condemned the Russo-German Pact and the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian uprising (though not the north Korean invasion of south Korea, but you can’t expect it all). Still, what a guy! Such courage and decency! Who could have believed it!

          • JohnEngelman

            He also condemned American involvement in Vietnam. He was right on that issue.

          • jim parks

            To a large extent the non-Communist, academic Marxist journal SCIENCE AND SOCIETY during the ’50’s and 60’s (and beyond) gave voice in one way or another to the very sorts of reservations Stone and other leftists outside the USSR had about that suffocatingly repressive–and frequently brutal–regime. Aside from Stone, the founders of the Marxist periodical MONTHLY REVIEW –including F.O. Mathiesson, Paul Sweezy, Philip Morrison–expressed in the early 50’s their reservations about life within the USSR.

          • Michael_C_Scott

            Yes, and the Chinese gave Sun Yat Sen a Ming tomb he wouldn’t have wanted. I’ve been there, and it is a Ming tomb.

          • danlieb7

            Typical unlettered stereotypes which bear no resemblance to reality. Ironically, that is exactly the archetypal Hollywood image of certain ethnic groups…i.e. blondes = dumb, blacks fall into 2 stereotypes= Super intelligent magic “side kick” who saves the day or the street thug, Asians= nerds with no sense of emotion etc.

            Despite the reservations against Hollywood in general, you seem to have taken a page directly from the H’wood manifesto.
            Asians are just s interesting or boring like anybody else. Some would say whites are too boring and stiff, does that make such stereotypes true? Of course NOT!
            Asians can be funny, interesting and versatile folks. Some of the funniest, creative & most interesting people I know are east Asian & Asian Indian. Jackie Chan for example is probably one of the funniest most entertaining and skilled movie celebrities alive today. He directs, produces, stars, does all his comic reliefs, dialogues, stunts ( probably some of the best stunts ever choreographed in human history for a movies) in his movies. He also writes the scripts, directs the fight/ action choreography and composes his own soundtrack/ music score for his movies – ALL in ONE! AND, he does an AWESOME job, his movies are huge hits worldwide across races, continents, languages and genders. Show me ONE, just ONE western movie star who has half the capability & genius of Mr Chan.





          • Michael_C_Scott

            They’re not automatons, and not humorless. As for “perverted” sex, I don’t know how to do that. Sayaka and I like taking showers together. Does that count?

          • Gracchus123

            Yet you claim to be White? And you prefer the company of another race to your own race? How curious. I too like some Orientals; a good friend in graduate school was South Korean, but I would never say that I “prefer them to Whites” (my own race). A very curious sentiment.

          • Gracchus123

            One of the fundamental questions is: why do we have to live together???

          • JohnEngelman

            Because Southern whites were too lazy to grow their own cotton and tobacco.

          • Gracchus123

            You said we have to learn to live together. I ask why. I stay away from blacks; and I will try very hard to continue to rather than “learn to live with them. I do not need to “learn to live together”.

          • JohnEngelman


            We got to live together
            We got to live together
            Everybody, sing it
            We got to live together
            Yeah, yeah
            We got to live together

            Now let me tell you about it

            Folks running around
            Talking a lot of jive
            Fussing and a fighting
            Might lose their lives

            You better raise your head up high
            Or else you might be dead
            You run around, jiving
            But don’t you be afraid, ’cause

            We got to live together
            I say, we got to live together
            Whoa, oh

            Running around late at night
            Don’t you worry
            You might have to fuss and fight
            It’s all right, ’cause
            Yes, we know everything

            More lyrics: http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/b/buddy_miles/#share

          • Gracchus123

            That’s a ridiculous statement.

          • dfdf

            Does this flag button even work? Get rid of this guy!

          • JohnEngelman

            They can get rid of me. They cannot turn the truths I post into falsehoods.

          • Gracchus123

            Please, take a rest.

          • Gracchus123

            Many of your “truths” are simply talking points of the Left. This is a White advocacy, race realist site, not a political advocacy site per se. And you, by your own post, say you prefer Orientals to Whites. Go figure.

          • JohnEngelman

            We differ as to why we think American Renaissance is valuable. I think it is valuable because one can state truths here that are dangerous to state elsewhere. The most important truths are that races differ significantly in average ability levels and behavior, and these differences are primarily genetic.

            It would be nice if one could say that on the OP Ed page of every newspaper in the country, and on prime time television, documenting the assertions with facts that are beyond dispute, and without suffering legal, economic, or social sanctions. It is necessary that one can say that somewhere.

          • Gracchus123

            That’s fine, but your political advocacy for your left-wing beliefs and your gloating about the recent election results are inappropriate. Do those things on a more appropriate site.

          • JohnEngelman

            My political advocacies include a desire for more restrictions on immigration, a harsher criminal justice system, and an end to affirmative action, forced school busing, and Aid to Families with Dependent Children.

            I want there to be no legal, economic, or social sanctions against agreeing with men like Arthur Jensen, J.Philippe Rushton, Charles Murray, and Jared Taylor.

          • SLCain

            political advocacies include a desire for more restrictions on
            immigration, a harsher criminal justice system, and an end to
            affirmative action, forced school busing, and Aid to Families with
            Dependent Children.”

            So you supported and voted for Barack Obama, a man who will oppose ALL of those things. I can only conclude that you are deranged, stupid, or both.

          • JohnEngelman

            The Republican Party exists to advance the economic interests of the richest 10 percent of the population. Now the GOP want to reduce Social Security and Medicare payments in order to finance more tax cuts for the rich.


            According to current figures from Immigration and Customs Enforcement — the federal agency responsible for deportations — Obama has removed 1.4 million people during his 42 months in office so far. Technically, that’s fewer than under George W. Bush, whose cumulative total was 2 million. But Bush’s number covers eight full years, which doesn’t allow an apples-to-apples comparison.

            If you instead compare the two presidents’ monthly averages, it works out to 32,886 for Obama and 20,964 for Bush, putting Obama clearly in the lead. Bill Clinton is far behind with 869,676 total and 9,059 per month. All previous occupants of the White House going back to 1892 fell well short of the level of the three most recent presidents.

          • SLCain

            Obama in 2008 got far more in campaign contributions from Wall Street than McCain did. He raised so much money that he was the first Presidential candidate since public financing was introduced to eschew such funding – it wasn’t worth the limitations it placed on his campaign.

            If you think that the Democratic party are tribunes of the people, then you are indeed stupid and deranged.

          • JohnEngelman

            Wall Street Turncoats: The Money Guys Loved Obama in ’08—This Year, Romney’s Their Manby Caitlin Dickson Aug 19, 2012 4:45 AM EDT
            In a reversal from 2008, employees of financial-services companies have given most of their $128 million and counting in 2012 political donations to groups and candidates on the right.

            In 2008 Wall Street loved Barack Obama. Four years later, even after billions in bailout money went to the banks under Obama’s watch, the tide has turned—by about $20 million.



            As long as our present system of legal bribery continues the Democrats will need to get their contributions where they can.

            The Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision of 2010, which overturned decades of legislation regulating corporate spending on campaigns was a large step in the wrong direction.

          • Don’t worry. Your heroic voice won’t be silenced. AR is well aware that a legion of Asian pussies would swamp the place in your defense. Against such an invasion, resistance is futile.

        • That’s one thing I can’t understand: philobantuism. Annoying, destructive, brutish, ….and ultimately alien & boring humanoids are …. admired ? This is idiocy that “passes all understanding”.

      • David Ashton

        Yes indeed. Jerry Rubin’s generational legacy.

        • JohnEngelman

          I doubt many people under thirty know who Jerry Rubin was.

          The growing popularity of socialism is politically significant in part because no on with national name recognition is advocating it. Young people see capitalism up close every day. Many of them don’t like it.

          • David Ashton

            Youthful ignorance was one of old “Do It!”‘s aims.
            Sadly, young people in the USA have not yet experienced “socialism” close up.

          • JohnEngelman

            If they visited Scandinavia they would come back with glowing accounts.

          • David Ashton

            This is because of the intelligence and homogeneity of the Norwegians and Swedes, but the strains of excessive socialism and PC are beginning to show in Sweden, and there is the immigration threat looming: of course, some young Americans unfortunately might not detect any problem with that. I think it was Wilmot Robertson (pseud) who noted that blacks prefer to take their holidays where they can find blonde chicks, rather than in Haiti or the Congo (now “Democratic Republic” of). State socialism was not much fun in Poland, Hungary or Albania, and it is not exactly wonderful in North Korea or some other places we could name with your super-IQ Mongolids in charge.

          • JohnEngelman

            If some blonde women prefer black men that is their prerogative Nevertheless, the female preference for successful men is universal. Black men seldom satisfy that preference. A black man who makes a lot of money legally or illegally has his pick of black women. There are many more black women than black men, because so many black men get murdered by other black men, or they are sent to prison.

          • David Ashton

            Isn’t there a site for Obama-supporting Israel-loving socialists, who want to live in communist China and who are unconscious of New Left infiltration of western academia, where you would be happier and less unpopular than here?

          • JohnEngelman

            I have been posting here ever since I read and appreciated Jared Taylor’s “The Color of Crime.”

            I have enjoyed political arguments ever since I advocated the integration of the elementary school I attended. I think I am good at it, and that I am able to ignore egregious insults.

          • Frans

            What do you mean by “Young people see capitalism up close every day”? There’s no capitalism. It’s crony capitalism that exists today and that’s not the same thing.

  • ageofknowledge

    The reason why I was laughing, almost to the point of tears, while reading this well-written piece is because it’s ALL TRUE!

    When a society makes all of its most important political decisions based on fictional historical fantasies, you know the outcome is going to be something less than desirable… perhaps even much much less.

  • ncpride

    You know, when I first saw this movie’s advertised opening date and who directed it, I looked at my hubby and ask him if he could for a moment imagine the total nonsense, lies and propaganda it would be full of…. looks like I was absolutely right on.

    • Gracchus123

      Indeed you were right on!! Many people, though, who are ignorant of history, will praise the movie for telling the story of this great American and the incredible contributions of the blacks during that period of history. Lincoln could not have won that war without their incalculable contributions, you know!! In fact these Americans praising that movie will love the image of the black soldier with his boot on the face of that dying White man!!

      • 5n4k33y35

        The image of the black soldier with his boot on the face of that dying white man is probably the raison d’etre of the whole movie.

        As far as I’m concerned, that moment is the whole “payload” and the rest of the movie is just the vehicle for the payload.

        • Gracchus123


  • Dom

    To bad. I love Daniel Day Lewis. He is truly great actor. Now I have only three movies worth watching. Hobbit, Anna Karenina, Les Miserables. I like to watch historical films but I am not going to pay ticket for a movie that propagades anti white racism. I still have my dignity left. I hope you do to.

  • Jeff

    Excellent review. Why am I not surprised at all. They should do a double feature of that with Redtails.

  • JohnEngelman

    Voice of America

    Penelope Poulou

    November 21, 2012

    Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln deviates from the traditional portrayal of the 16th U.S. president by fleshing out the mind of a person willing to risk everything for the abolition of slavery. Spielberg based his film on parts of Team of Rivals, a book by Doris Kearns Goodwin. He makes Abraham Lincoln relevant today by presenting a cunning political mind navigating Washington’s all too familiar divisions, gridlock, and power plays…

    Spielberg’s Lincoln will head to the Oscars. But more important, it will make history.


    • Gracchus123

      Doris Kearns Goodwin…quoting other authors without attribution.

      “…fleshing out the mind of a person willing to risk everything for the abolition of slavery.” In other words, putting into Lincoln’s mind/mouth anything he wants to.

  • Mike Berman

    Not mentioned is that Steven Spielberg has two adopted black sons and has said that in his soul he is black. I believe him.

    • IstvanIN

      Perhaps he meant his soul is black?

    • I didn’t know about adoptions, but … I’m not surprised, too.

  • White_Prime77

    ‘Lincoln’ doesn’t appear to take as much liberty with its subject matter as one of Spielbergs other black flicks: Amistad. (One can read the Amren archives for that one)

    1.) The flick actually does show Gen. Lee for a moment, surrendering to Grant. Both doffed their hats at each other and proved themselves to be gentlemen. Lee was not shown to be some Ralph Fienes N**i.

    2.) The Vice President of the Confederacy, Alexander Stephens was actually shown pretty accurately. He was in fact a hard-core White Supremacist, that is just the fact of the matter.

    3.) There is one scene where President Lincoln has a conversation with a Black Lady (one of his White House maids?). The Black Lady says that many Whites want to send the Blacks back to Africa. President Lincoln then states in effect that perhaps Whites and Blacks may in time be able to live together. Hey that is a pretty big opening and is open to alot of interpretation. Given the ongoing Black Flash Mobs (and even just the events of the last Black Fridays shopping riots, mostly with Blacks) one can see that ‘America’ is just not going to work out.

    4.) Alot of these neo-Confederates out there need to finally just let it go. The Old South was full of Negroes! Even today many Southern States are chock full of Blacks (I think Missouri is really close to having a Black Majority, something that hasn’t happened for awhile) As a White Nationalist I want a White Ethno-State free of the presence of criminally prone Blacks! Something akin to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Territorial_Imperative The South just doesn’t come close to that ideal and so all this neo-Confederate jaberwocky is mostly a waste of time in my view.

    Lets leave Lincoln in the past and get to work with the new burgeoning Successionist Movement that has come into being as a healthy reaction to the re-appointment of Dictator Barrack Ogabe. To the future!

    • I think Missouri is really close to having a Black Majority, something that hasn’t happened for awhile


      By the next census, the City of St. Louis might not have a black majority, thanks to gentrification. Much less the whole state, which Census says is 84% white.

      • White_Prime77

        Hmm… I stand corrected.

        However the number of dangerous criminally prone Blacks in some of these Southern States is close to reaching a critical mass:


        Alabama – 48 percent black
        Georgia – 46 percent black
        South Carolina -59 percent black
        Mississippi – 54 percent black
        Florida – 49 percent black
        Louisiana – 50 percent black
        Texas – 31 percent black
        North Carolina -37 percent black
        Tennessee – 26 percent black
        Arkansas – 25 percent
        Missouri – 7 percent
        Kentucky – 17 percent
        Virginia – 42 percent
        Maryland – 22 percent

        Here’s the percentage of the black population in the South in 2012:


        Alabama – 26.2 percent
        Georgia – 30.5 percent
        South Carolina – 27.9 percent
        Mississippi – 37 percent
        Florida – 16 percent
        Louisiana – 32 percent
        Texas – 11.8 percent
        North Carolina – 21.5 percent
        Tennessee – 16.7 percent
        Arkansas – 15.4 percent
        Missouri – 11.6 percent
        Kentucky – 7.8 percent
        Virginia – 19.4 percent
        Maryland – 29.4 percent’


    • Missouri ? Not Mississippi, let alone Missouri.

    • Gracchus123

      Many “neo-confederates” are holding onto the idea of rejection of the “all-powerful” central government and the dissolution of States’ rights. In that regard, I am with them. Regarding the re-constitution of The South, I agree with you.

    • David Ashton

      The old Communist Party of the United States wanted a Black Ethno-State. One can understand the desire for partition, but giving up territory to criminals is to be avoided.

      • IstvanIN

        Is it better to stay entangled with them? We need a divorce, we are the battered and wronged party. We need to move on and recover.

        • David Ashton

          Plans for the reduced exclusive White Homeland are contradictory and impracticable. Stricter law enforcement, a revival of eugenics, freedom of association in schools and at work, seem more practical, but this is a debate best left to Americans rather than transatlantic observers like me.
          Again, my advice to all: (1) Secure the heritage (education, libraries, films &c); (2) breed like kind; & (3) master the technology as well as content of the internet.

          • IstvanIN

            How do you plan to do that? All out war against our new overlords?

          • David Ashton

            No, warfare against presently stronger state forces or attacking innocent black people are suggestions from others on this site, not me.
            I believe in self-defense against violence, but I also believe in properly directed political warfare and organization. If the communists were able to do it, so can white patriots with all the advantages of electronic communication.
            There is much to learn from “Cultural Marxist” techniques, but in opposition to the hateful world they are trying to create. Meanwhile, we make sure we have enough children and grandchildren, and educate them in western civilization. The New Century Foundation has a role to play.

    • Eagle_Eyed

      Northerners like us will always view the Civil War (excuse me, War Between the States) differently from our Southern brethren. I can’t blame them for defending their heritage–particularly when it is criticized to an unhealthy degree by the left.

      The war was truly about the economic system of slavery. With the increase of Northern abolitionism which hated slavery and the expansion of Americans westward, both sides found themselves in more places to build up bitterness toward one another. All one has to do is look at conflicts in the 1850s between Free State settlers and pro-slavery sympathizers in places like Kansas and Missouri. One side saw slavery as the greatest evil and needed to be stopped while the other had been operating peaceably under this system for generations. To the South, if they didn’t do something their sovereignty and rights would vanish. And to the North, any expansion of slavery or Southern autonomy was a threat. To simply cede in this conflict would only beget trouble later on as both sides moved westward.

      What does bother me is when Southerners claim war wasn’t wanted. When Ft. Sumter was attacked and the Confederacy established, it was done because the South wanted war. They knew what they were doing. Sadly, on top of our 600,000 white dead Christian American ancestors who died, the political/social battles regarding race and diversity fought since have been thoroughly damaging to traditional white Americans of any state.

      • Gracchus123

        The biggest tragedy of “The Recent Unpleasantness”(phrase used by Southern ladies who could not say the word “war”) was the loss of the 600,000. A huge blow to the White gene pool in America.

    • David Ashton

      Point 3 is definitely a misrepresentation of Lincoln’s prescient pessimism.

  • Captain Amurrika

    You mean the Jewish Spielberg, from Hollywood, didn’t tell an accurate story about the tyrant Lincoln? I am utterly shocked. Along the way attacking whites and making blacks look like Saints. Was this movie the “Machete” of the civil war? Or “Django Unchained”?

    Yes, Hollywood has a sick fetish when it comes to genocidal themes regarding the destruction of whites. So of course they would get off on telling a story about the War of Northern Aggression and the genocide of southern whites.

    I am sure many wonderful quotes from Lincoln were ignored in this accurate movie.

    “If I could save The Union without freeing any slaves, I would do it” — Abraham Lincoln, in a letter to Horace Greeley

    “Negro equality? Fudge!” — Abraham Lincoln, Fragments: Notes for Speeches, Sept. 1859 (Vol. III)

    “Free them, and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this…. We cannot, then, make them equals.” — Abraham Lincoln, “Lincoln’s Reply to Douglas,” p. 444

    “What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races.” — Abraham Lincoln, Spoken at Springfield, Illinois on July 17th, 1858; from Abraham Lincoln: Complete Works, 1894, Volume 1, page 273

    “I acknowledge the constitutional rights of the States, not grudgingly, but fairly and fully, and I will give them any legislation for reclaiming their fugitive slaves.” — Abraham Lincoln in speeches at Peoria, Illinois

    “I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” Abraham Lincoln’s Inaugural Address on the Capitol steps, 1861

    “Do the people of the South really entertain fear that a Republican administration would directly or indirectly interfere with their slaves, or with them about their slaves? If they do, I wish to assure you as once a friend, and still, I hope, not an enemy, that there is no cause for such fears. The South would be in no more danger in this respect than it was in the days of Washington.” — Letter from Abraham Lincoln to A.H. Stephens, Public and Private Letters of Alexander Stephens, p. 150

    “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and to form one that suits them better. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may make their own of such territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority intermingling with or near them who oppose their movement.” — Abraham Lincoln on the floor of Congress, January 12, 1848, Congressional Globe, Appendix 1st Session 30th Congress, page 94

    “Only a despotic and imperial government can coerce seceding states” – William Seward, U.S. Secretary of State under Abraham Lincoln on 10 April 1861 to Charles Francis Adams, Minister to the Court of St. James (Britain)

    Lincoln was a hypocrite, liar, tyrant and dictator. He comes off as a sociopath to me. Or as a politician.

  • Much better review than Sailer’s at takimag.

  • SLCain

    To the editors: If you want to delete my reasonable expressions of disgust at the creature known as “John Engelman” it is your right to do so. However, I made no use of profanity, nor did I call him anything that was unsupported by the very things he has written here, and by the very attitude of contempt he routinely shows to all of us and to the underlying principals of this site.

    If you want this to become the “John Engelman 24/7 website”…. go ahead. See how popular THAT Is with your readership.

    • derrick

      I second that. He needs to go. There are many people here with differing views, from quasi-socialist to libertarian and from christian to atheist. Engleman is not simply someone with a different viewpoint. He is a troll who is purposely causing trouble. There’s a difference.

      • Jerrybear

        He’s just an Mongolphile statist. I haven’t seen him write anything that deserves him to be banned.

      • JohnEngelman

        I cause trouble for those who are incapable of arguing rationally.

    • Michael_C_Scott

      John doesn’t need to go. I don’t feel intimidated by him, and this is the deep end of the pool, boys and girls. Of course he’s a trollish statist. It doesn’t matter

    • JohnEngelman

      You are intolerant of other opinions and incapable of rationally defending your own.

      • SLCain

        Everyone is intolerant of at least some opinions that he disagrees with. Anyone who isn’t, is a fool. And by the way, you have demonstrated ample intolerance here, as you shout down with anyone you disagree with, burying them in hundreds of lengthy posts, of interest to almost no one but yourself.

        I object to anti-white propaganda being spread on what is supposed to be a pro-white site. We don’t need you here. I could tune into MSNBC, or read the New York Times, to get a whiff of the trash you spread here.

        • JohnEngelman


          You have a big ego. Unfortunately, your high self image is unjustified. Your strong opinions are not substantiated by intelligence and learning, but emotion. Humans share emotions with other mammals. What separates some humans from the rest of the class mammalia is the ability to evaluate evidence and weigh arguments.

          I am a race realist. I believe that genes are considerably more important than anything else in determining not only ability levels, but personality and character.I also believe that the genes that determine ability levels. personalty, and character are distributed unequally among the races, so that racial differences are intractable.

          In all of this I agree almost entirely with Professor J. Philippe Rushton, who spoke at six American Renaissance conferences.


          I only disagree with Professor Rushton in his explanation of how racial differences evolved. I think the evolution of racial differences was better explained in “The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution.” This received a favorable review that was posted in American Renaissance here:


          Professor Rushton attributes racial differences to evolving in different climates. He does not explain why the Neanderthals, who evolved in Europe during several ice ages, were less intelligent than the Cro Magnons who displaced them.

          The authors of “The 10,000 Year Explosion,” professors Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending, attribute racial differences to the different amounts of time the different races have been exposed to agriculture and urban civilization. Professors Rushton, Cochran, and Harpending have experienced the intolerance of those who, like you, resist exposure to other points of view.

          You sirrah are a disgrace to American Renaissance. You are also a danger to it, because you help to shape the image of American Renaissance in the eyes of those who would like to shut it down and prevent future American Renaissance conferences. They want to convince others that the American Renaissance community consists of ignorant, irrational haters like you.

          • SLCain

            And what makes you so smart, you bloviating ass? Your ability to cut and paste wikipedia articles in the blink of an eye? Yours is not a new and different point of view. Yours is the point of view I can get by turning on day-time TV, other than your (probably) visceral dislike of black people which you try to pretty up with some sociology. So you subscribe to the AR point of view on blacks, but you vote for Obama, and so enable everything that AR warns about. Have you ever gone to an Obama rally and mentioned what a big fan of Phillipe Rushton you are? I’m sure that would go over big. You are not worth listening to, you are a preening nitwit.

            And, by the way, I’m a hell of a lot smarter than you, you simpering twerp.

            Just go away – you are not wanted here.

  • Superb review. Alec Ryan has an excellent satirical voice. I won’t be seeing the movie, but I’ll never forget this review. Ha, Ha, Ha!

  • SLCain

    From the review: “A white face is stamped, drowning, into the mud by a booted black man.”

    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.
    – George Orwell, 1984

    • Michael_C_Scott

      Now you know why I always post under my own real name.

  • StillModerated

    If Spielberg or Lucas make a movie, then count me out! I recommend Argo — which my local paper (the Free-Lance Star) described as the best movie of the year.

  • Gereng

    Lincoln was as Booth declared him to be- a bloody handed tyrant. His ineptitude caused the death and suffering of millions of Americans.

  • Rogoraeck

    Hollycrap propaganda made by a schmuck from the morlock tribe!

  • Michael_C_Scott

    I do not agree that John Engleman should be tossed out, even though I have baited him.

  • NorthernWind

    I graciously informed some ignorant twits about the real Lincoln and the real facts about the Civil war on some internet forum. They responded very poorly calling me a “Lincoln hater” and claimed that I was a “buzzkill”. Haha.

    I guess that they aren’t interested in real history. All they need is left-wing distorted history that makes them feel good. It’s morally righteous to derive pleasure from depictions of racist White Confederates being killed by noble Union Blacks after all. It shows how morally outstanding you are! A good anti-Whi… I mean anti-racist!

  • white liberals are satanic

    Liberal whites still in revisionist mode rub it in but does anyone really have see the movie or even read anything on it to know whats in it in these times? Didnt the white real jew messiah warn 2k yrs ago to be wise as serpents? Didnt European white real latino Constantine approve and put it all in stone? Why have whites ignored all these warnings or are they that gullilble in their ignorance and stupidity?
    Why didnt some white US president arise after 1789 and get a law passed to abolish slavery but only with the stipulation that they had to be returned to Africa permanently?
    Couldnt the great genius’s like Jefferson or Madison have easily had this done to rehabilitate themselves from what did in their DOI and USC making all races in the equality pc mode including religion pretty much neutering the supremacy of WMR over the other pagan systems?

  • Speilberg has found his true medium, making up new multi-cult-friendly versions of history. You’d think he would have learned his lesson with “The Last Days” or whatever that turd was called about a jewess pretending to have swallowed the family diamonds every day to hide them from diamond-horading nazi’s until she was rescued by the Noble Negro Regiment….who, incidentally, never actually liberated a concentration camp.

  • Spielberg is so predictable and insults the intelligence of his audience. I know some young white people that would be enraged by this farce.

  • Contrarius Aidiocia

    You are a disgusting racist. Go back to the Confederacy, asshole.

  • LHathaway

    “Steven Spielberg’s latest “historical” sermon begins with The Bearded One smiling beatifically at two black Union soldiers”

    i expected the soldiers would be enjoined in holy matrimony. Sorry, i must read the local paper here too much. . .

    • danlieb7

      The south LOST! Deal with it, boy! The white christian conservative (snip: race conscious/ realist whatever) LOST in 2008 making way for the pro-multicultural culture, ideology and government lead by President Barak Hussein Obama in 2012! Then came the 4 years fierce resistance from the white race conscious christian right (evangelicals, catholics, etc), the “tea baggers”, glenn becks, faux news, limbaughs, ted nugents, ann coulters, laura ingrahams, armed pro gun militias etc who desperately tried to get rid of President Obama, trying in vain to thwart and undermine his reign. BUT, all in vain…..In Nov 7, 2012 history was made again, when despite all the collective resistance by the majority of whites ( I personally know many race conscious white christians as friends or coworkers who went out to vote for Mittens just to be rid of Obama) President Barak Hussein Obama was RE-ELECTED as the President of the United States of America, thereby DEFEATING & destroying ALL his collective enemies and detractors (white race conscious conservative christians who believe in the “traditional America” BS)

      Well, now all these right wing pro life, pro war, pro gun race conscious white conservative christians can do is whine like a bunch of sorry pussies through right wing media outlets and moan like whores on various right wing websites. To them I say – cry me a river and get a life-losers!

      U can delete me, but can never erase the truth!

      The WINNERS:



      The LOSERS: Priceless reactions 🙂




      • SLCain

        “The south LOST! Deal with it, boy!”

        Hey, the Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans smashed Israel.

        Deal with it, boy.

        • danlieb7

          Hah, but at least Israel ROSE and kicked ass to be the 1st world technologically advanced super state that it is today, has the south ever risen? NO. Since 1865 circa era, the south and all her sympathizers (that includes race conscious white christians from the north, east and west too) have progressively LOST their ground and WILL keep losing their ground until they become serfs to their non white masters in their own land. All your guns, ammo, bibles, out of control low IQ hicks and conservative views will be of NO help in this inevitable future.

          As for victorious Israel. Heck, we have NEVER lost a single war ever since we were created in 1948. In that time, we have managed to kick the butts of the Babylonians, Arabs, Persians and all our former enemies.Today Greece, Italy and the Arab islamic world are economic and cultural basket cases with NO viable future. Meanwhile Israel continues to kicks butt and WIN as efficient, advanced and progressive uber state in terms of science, technology, research, culture, music, arts, political power and military finesse. Israel and her influential wings and people practically control the politics and economy of the United States. The best part is that you know it and I know it and you know that I know that you know it 🙂 Deal with it boy! I am Israel. We are Israel!







        • danlieb7

          But Israel has risen to greatness ever since and since our creation in 1947, we have NEVER lost a single war! Where did the south ever rise? Answer: NEVER! Since 1865, the south & her sympathizers all over the nation have progressively LOST ground and will continue to do so.

          As for victorious Israel – Far from it we have smashed all our enemies i.e. Arabs, Babylonians, Persians etc. And while we have managed to successfully build a super advanced 1st world, vibrant, technological, scientific, economic and military uber state which is powerful enough to muscle and deeply command America’s political, economic and cultural policies, the pathetic epic failures of our times i.e. Greece and Italy are shinning examples of epic losers in modern times. These two nations, especially Greece are economic & social basket cases with NO viable future. They are going the way of the dinosaurs. And compared to us Israelis/ Jews, the insignificant greeks and italians are nowhere even close to comparison in terms of our envious economic, scientific, technological, political, military, cultural, media and academic success & clout we enjoy in the most powerful circles in the world.

          Israel = AWESOME!





        • JohnEngelman

          Psalm 129:1-2 Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth, may Israel now say: Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth: yet they have not prevailed against me.


          The Bablyonian, Greek, and Roman civilizations fell.

          With a population of only eight million, Israel is one of the strongest countries in the world. One out of five Nobel Prizes has been won by a Jew.

      • David Ashton

        Your true colors are showing.

      • SLCain

        “I am Israel. We are Israel.”

        Gee, I thought you said you were an American citizen. Thanks for clearing that up. You are an Israeli who finds it convenient to have an American passport. As someone once said of many American jews: “Dual loyalty would be an improvement”.

      • Frans

        The south lost. The entire country lost….thousands. Close to a million Americans died in the Civil War. Countless homes, towns, property were destroyed. So much was lost. All for politics. Nothing more. There was nothing noble about Lincoln and his war. He was nothing but the usual self-serving politician. The war had nothing to do with slavery….freeing slaves. What people in their right minds would fight a war to end slavery? No one. The Yankees didn’t fight to end slavery and the Confederates didn’t fight to maintain it. Only an idiot believes in that revisionist history. That’s what the corrupt government wants you to believe.

  • William Allingham

    PLEASE dont see the movies of Spielberg, stop giving money to these bigots

    • David Ashton

      A little riddle: What is the difference between Steven Spielberg and Jerry Springer?

      Note to the ADL & the UK Community Security Trust: After seeing Woody Allen’s lovely little joke on screen about “those people who write letters” about the antisemitism of the phrase “Jews’ harp”, I exempt him from criticism; also I always enjoyed “Seinfeld”, so I can discriminate in the best sense of the word.

  • As a student of history, I took this movie as the end phase (which it was) of on era and the beginning of a new era. I’m a Yankee and I don’t believe in slavery. But I also realize the slavery that existed here wasn’t all that bad by comparison to slavery as it existed down through the ages. Also, there is the point that though mechanization, slavery was doomed here. It would’ve only lasted a few more years and wouldn’t have been worth keeping slaves anymore.
    The new phase I spoke of was black equality. That was a great mistake. Now that we know of the error, we should move to remove the blacks from This nation. Humanely of course, but removed they must be. for their own good.

  • the truth

    How about at the end of the movie after winning the vote on the amendment, Lincoln and his wife are riding away satisfied and he mentions he wants to travel, specifically to the holy land so he could walk where David and Solomon walked without mentioning Jesus Christ.

    Can you imagine how unrealistic that comment would be for someone like Lincoln at that time in our history.

    Never mind David and Solomon never spoke even one word in the old testament of concern or interest in helping any oppressed races other than their own jewish race.And Jesus was the one who constantly spoke of the importance of helping the poor and the oppressed and the widows and orphans.

    Solomon was too busy collecting wealth and pagan wives and David was busy spying on Uriah’s wife Bathsheba as she was bathing on her roof and then he sent uriah to the front so he could get killed and leave Bathsheba a widow so David could marry her.
    I don’t think either of those would have been Lincoln’s idols, LOL.
    Those lines by Kushner and Spielberg definitely had an agenda, I guess they couldn’t bear to have their characters refer to Jesus in a positive way in their movie.

  • time travel

    This heinous peasant would have never existed had tribal chiefs not have been willing to sell off millions of their rejects to white slave traders who auctioned them off to ignorant gullible white elite after the west was opened under the guise of needing soft manual labor to pick cotten or clean house. Otherwise this entire mess would have never happened. It is clear now that African slaves were needed like a hole in the head and African slavery was simply terrible economics that hurt the white labor force while opening the door for serpent Marx to slither in to sink his fangs into brains and inject his deadly venom. The past 500 years has been bizarre and lethal to say the least and should have been avoided.
    Invent a time machine to reverse it all like Superman reversed the earth rotation. Erase this terrible heinous crime against an entire race and civilization. Arrest and execute all African slave traders or potential slave traders. It was never meant to happen and a complete miscalculated misguided monumental mistake. Blacks would all be happily back in their new world order natural environment and never been subjected to this terrible slave tragedy inflicted on them that needs to be corrected with advanced technological reverse time travel.

  • ozark307

    The battle mentioned and briefly depicted in the opening scenes is of a real engagement in 1864, the battle of Jenkins Ferry in Arkansas. This occurred on April 29 and 30 and was part of the Red River Campaign.

    Myths and stories abound over what took place during the battle and a preceding minor engagement, Poison Springs, also in Arkansas.

  • Control of the historical narrative is a central battlefield in the class struggle. There has not been an honest book about the Civil War since the 1930s.

  • Jew avoiding Jews

    More jews telling us that jews won the civil war, that a jew was the president, and even, if they weren’t jews, that all blacks were jews. Let’s not forget that the movie was written by jews, directed by a jew and entirely cast with jews (except where they couldn’t actually cast them).
    Spielberg and Zemekis have started to make me puke, and deliberately avoid their movie vomit.

  • Robert Humphrey LeChef

    Lincoln certainly does have the Magic Negro element. It’s obnoxious. However, the comments below are just as cookie cutter as evarrr. First of all, the Midwest, which it seems is what many of your call “real America”, is idealized only by the low IQ hicks that lives in those parts or by white people who’ve never been there, much like the leftists who have embraced a sort of hipster version of “Buddhism” idealize Tibet as this Garden of Eden against which we must measure the current surroundings. Idealizing the middle class is just plain stupid. After all, it’s the middle class that’s a hotbed of neoliberalism, or that obnoxious Jimbo, philistine, arrogant neoconservatism that makes true conservatives puke. The cities and towns are just as F-ed, although in different ways. Residents of both are equally annoying.

    The fact of the matter is that the problem is a religious one. Do you know why men have either degenerated into limp-wristed coffee shop waiters or those obnoxious secretly gay, gym macho, chip-on-their-shoulder, often meatheaded mockeries of true masculinity? It’s because the culture has distorted the image of men, and both Protestantism and Catholicism have become not those forces which inspire men towards true masculinity—which is the noble, humble but not stupid or subservient sacrificial attitude towards the true, the good, and the beautiful—but bedfellows of the establishment. Protestantism was real conforming willingly with the putrid currents of the culture long before Catholicism finally caved in and Protestantized itself in the 60s. But let’s not stop there. Women are a disgrace as well. Women have been a disgrace in this country for longer than we can fault feminism for (feminism contributed, but you can’t lay it all on feminism, and feminism did raise a few good points). Einstein already commented in the 1920s how he’d never seen, in all his travels in the world, such a sad state of affairs among women as he had seen in the US (google for it). I’m willing to you trace the dour state of affairs of both sexes in the US to the Puritans of Taxachusetts. After all, who were most immigrants who came to the US (and face it, all white people are the product of immigrants)? The weirdos. They were the weird religious freaks that no one wanted to deal with in Europe. People with weird ideas. Fortunately, as long as the US remained a decentralized bunch of states full of little societies that generally left each other alone, no one in the world cared. The craziness of Crazy Dave or the gayness of Gay Steve were his business as long as his stayed in his forest shack. Even that despicable American pragmatism, which is the substrate for many of the countries woes, went undisturbed. But as soon as the desire for empire infected the minds of American politicians and the media machine, this is where the stinking maw of hell was flung open. Depravity had a place to stand and a long level to move the world with.

    Now, the US isn’t the only source of things corrupting the Western world, to be sure. But it shares, by far, most of the burden. Now, you cannot love what you don’t know. If you refuse to know your country, as both left and right these days do, for what it truly is, how can you love it? What you love is a fantasy, or a figment, drawn from your imagination. Love for one’s country is the desire and the courage to take a good hard look at the flaws it has. All of them. They could have been flaws that preceded the founding of the country. It doesn’t matter. I understand this is a terribly difficult thing for us Americans to do. After all, the only thing that many think makes the American people American are political objects, or worse, economic ideas. Economics and politics are important aspect of social life, but it is a hideous and shallow thing to reduce life to any of them. Perhaps common history is a proper way to identify. It’s hard to say. I’m not prepared to answer the question. America is, after all, like Australia or Canada, a very different kind of country than the countries of the Old World where national identity, while not cut and dry, is very stable. The fact that no true distinctly American high culture exists or likely could exist without major changes in the way “American” is defined is a sad reality. Perhaps we must resign ourselves to the idea of a “society of societies”. Such a move would require a reversion to a more decentralized US of the past, before the feds seized control.

    As far as “ethnic whites” are concerned, I would be careful not to stereotype (ironically, you’re falling into the stereotype of the stereotyping American by doing so, and it’s a thing Americans need to overcome, along with the “pity attitude” towards immigrants or people of other countries. Travel a little instead of idealizing home.). What you’re likely seeing are working class immigrants with little true appreciation, respect, or even knowledge of their homeland’s culture (and hence the readiness of some to adopt what you call wiggerish tendencies). However, what you don’t appear to be noticing is the vast presence of “ethnic whites” (which is a degrading and stupid term, I might add. The only difference between us and them is either the degree of assimilation or the degree of integration) in the middle and upper classes. There is a disproportionate degree of wealth and education among immigrants and their children in America, and not just among Asian immigrants. The average white American looks like a loser next to these people who have made good use of the opportunities available here. Again, it’s not as if America is inherently and the only “land of opportunity”. But many of those who have come to the US have made very good use of what’s here economically speaking, much better use than Americans do. I attribute this in part to the ethos and culture they brought with them. I see integration as preferable to something as despotic as assimilation. However, if there is any distaste for assimilation, it’s not surprising. The US doesn’t present an attractive thing to assimilate into. Assimilation would constitute a culture downgrade. Americans who don’t realize this are unfortunately ignorant of culture and history, lacking in any deep understanding of them and instead dealing in the cheap cliches that feel good and allow us to dismiss the superiority of others in many areas (these do not include the Magic, Baby Daddy Negro, btw, or the turdish 21st century white man).

    G. K. Chesterton once wrote, at the beginning of the century, that the madness of tomorrow would come not from Moscow, but from Manhattan. At around the same time, Pius X predicted the fallout of the superheresy of modernism. I think both are predictions are, to men of unhazy wits, on the money. Listening to blacks moan in the stagnation of the ghetto, and the leftists who keep them there, may be annoying, but the whole constellation of problems everyone here likes to moan about is part of a far larger phenomenon. We can’t dance around it anymore. We can’t pretend the moral decay of our country, and the world, isn’t a reality. We can’t pretend we are responsible for letting it happen.

  • My mother says she can’t blame the white man for worrying.Blacks have shown superior performance in almost everything in spite of the obstacles placed on them for the past 400 years and even now in 2013. Sorry critics, you can’t have it ur way all of the time.

    • Dave West

      In the entire time that whites and blacks have coexisted together, here are the only things that blacks are superior at compared to whites.

      Football (some positions)
      Rapping and some other types of singing
      Some types of dancing
      Being loud
      Being rude
      Lacking intelligence
      Being poster boys for fried chicken fast food chains founded by whites
      Low test scores